Skip to main content

Table 5 Efficiency of EQ-5D-5 L and SF-6D to detect differences of dichotomized ODI groups

From: A head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-5 L and SF-6D in Chinese patients with low back pain

Measure

Dichotomies of ODI health status†

N (%)

Mean ± SD

ES

RE

ROC curve

AUC

95% CI

EQ-5D-5 L

1

95 (35%)

0.85 ± 0.13

0.42

1.48

0.89*

(0.85, 0.93)

2–5

177 (65%)

0.47 ± 0.34

SF-6D

1

95 (35%)

0.7 ± 0.14

0.28

1

0.82*

(0.77, 0.87)

2–5

177 (65%)

0.54 ± 0.11

EQ-5D-5 L

1 and 2

193 (71%)

0.76 ± 0.18

0.47

1.4

0.93*

(0.90, 0.97)

3–5

79 (29%)

0.22 ± 0.32

SF-6D

1 and 2

193 (71%)

0.64 ± 0.13

0.33

1

0.87*

(0.82, 0.91)

3–5

79 (29%)

0.48 ± 0.1

EQ-5D-5 L

1–3

240 (88%)

0.69 ± 0.24

0.27

1.33

0.97*

(0.94, 0.99)

4 and 5

32 (12%)

−0.04 ± 0.25

SF-6D

1–3

240 (88%)

0.61 ± 0.14

0.2

1

0.91*

(0.86, 0.95)

4 and 5

32 (12%)

0.43 ± 0.07

  1. †1 to 5 represents different levels of low back pain measured by ODI from minimal disability to bedbound
  2. *indicates that area under the ROC curve statistically significantly greater than 0.5 and that measure has discriminatory power (P < 0.001)
  3. EQ-5D-5 L 5-level EuroQol 5-dimension, SF-6D Short Form 6-dimension, ODI Oswestry Disability Index, SD Standard deviations, ES Effect size, RE Relative efficiency, ROC Receiver Operating Characteristic, AUC Area Under Curve, CI Confidence Interval
Back to article page

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us