Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2007 Jun;16(5):895-904.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-006-9160-6. Epub 2007 Feb 10.

Evaluating the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon's indices

Mathieu F Bas Janssen  1 , Erwin Birnie, Gouke J Bonsel
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Evaluating the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon's indices

Mathieu F Bas Janssen et al. Qual Life Res. 2007 Jun.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare quantitatively the discriminatory power of the EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in terms of absolute and relative informativity, using Shannon's indices.

Methods: EQ-5D and HUI2/3 data completed by a sample of the general adult US population (N = 3,691) were used. Five dimensions allowed head-to-head comparison of informativity: Mobility/Ambulation; Anxiety/Depression/Emotion; Pain/Discomfort (EQ-5D; HUI2; HUI3); Self-Care (EQ-5D; HUI2); and Cognition (HUI2; HUI3). Shannon's index and Shannon's Evenness index were used to assess absolute and relative informativity, both by dimension and by instrument as a whole.

Results: Absolute informativity was highest for HUI3, with the largest differences in Pain/Discomfort and Cognition. Relative informativity was highest for EQ-5D, with the largest differences in Mobility/Ambulation and Anxiety/Depression/Emotion. Absolute informativity by instrument was consistently highest for HUI3 and lowest for EQ-5D, and relative informativity was highest for EQ-5D and lowest for HUI3.

Discussion: Performance in terms of absolute and relative informativity of the common dimensions of the three instruments varies over dimensions. Several dimensions are suboptimal: Pain/Discomfort (EQ-5D) seems too crude with only 3 levels, and the level descriptions of Ambulation (HUI3) and Self-Care (HUI2) could be improved. In absence of a formal measure, Shannon's indices provide useful measures for assessing discriminatory power of utility instruments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Examples of Absolute Informativity (H′) and Relative Informativity (J′) with Skewed and Rectangular Distributions in a 3 Level System and 5 Level System
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The Shannon Index (H′) and the Shannon Evenness Index formula image for the common dimensions between EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3: comparison by dimension. NA = not available; formula image Confidence intervals had an average range of 0.0012 (H′) and of 0.00081 (J′)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '8452328', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8452328/'}]}
    2. Guyatt, G. H., Feeny, D. H., & Patrick, D. L. (1993). Measuring health-related quality-of-life. Annals of Internal Medicine, 118, 622–629. - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '11679145', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11679145/'}]}
    2. Mishoe, S. C., & Maclean, J. R. (2001). Assessment of health-related quality of life. Respiratory Care, 46, 1236–1257. - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '10392311', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10392311/'}]}
    2. Brazier, J., Deverill, M., Green, C., Harper, R., & Booth, A. (1999). A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment, 3, 1–164. - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.2165/00019053-200017010-00002', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200017010-00002'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '10747763', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10747763/'}]}
    2. Coons, S. J., Rao, S., Keininger, D. L., & Hays, R. D. (2000). A comparative review of generic quality-of-life instruments. Pharmacoeconomics, 17, 13–35. - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '11491192', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11491192/'}]}
    2. Rabin R., de Charro F. (2001) EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Annals of Medicine 33, 337–343. - PubMed