Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparison of the performance of Models 1 and 2

From: Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 onto EQ-5D for the assessment of cancer patients

  

Model 1a

Model 2b

Derivation set

   

Adjusted R2

 

0.511

0.516

RMSE (% RMSE)

 

0.095 (8.1)

0.095 (8.1)

MAE (SD)

 

0.069 (0.065)

0.069 (0.066)

MAE > 0.05(%)

 

48.7

50.1

MAE > 0.1(%)

 

22.4

23.1

EQ-5D index

Actual

Predicted

Predicted

Mean (SD)

0.824 (0.137)

0.823 (0.098)

0.824 (0.098)

Validation set

   

RMSE (% RMSE)

 

0.083 (7.1)

0.085 (7.2)

MAE (SD)

 

0.066 (0.052)

0.066 (0.053)

MAE > 0.05(%)

 

53.7

49.6

MAE > 0.1(%)

 

23.6

24.4

EQ-5D index

Actual

Predict

Predict

Mean (SD)

0.871 (0.113)

0.873 (0.083)

0.872 (0.085)

  1. aModel 1 included all functioning and symptom scales and items of the EORTC QLQ-C30 as explanatory variables.
  2. bModel 2 applied backward elimination to Model 1.
Back to article page

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us