Skip to main content

Table 4 Model performance for the best fitting model (Direct mapping)

From: Mapping the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire (MLHFQ) to EQ-5D-5L in patients with heart failure

Model SpecificationMean utility (SD)MinP.25MedianP.75MaxRMSEMAEAbs diff < 0.03Abs diff < 0.05ICC
Observed0.6619−0.26300.55300.70800.87701.0000     
Model 1 (MFP)
Cross validation sample0.71640.26790.58580.75200.86040.92540.22880.171312.718.30.513
Model 2 (MFP)
 Cross validation sample0.72240.29200.61320.74140.86530.92630.22680.168411.316.90.520
Model 3 (MFP)
 Cross validation sample0.70860.28830.61770.74730.86550.86550.22040.167613.420.40.517
  1. Dependant variable: EQ-5D-5 L utility score; Independent variables: Model 1 - MLHF total score; Model 2 – MLHF domain scores; Model 3 – MLHF item scores.
  2. Abs diff. < 0.03 (0.05)% - proportion of predicted utilities whose absolute values deviate from the mean of the observed utility values by less than 0.03 (0.05); P.25 – 25th percentile; P.75 – 75th percentile; RMSE – Root Mean Square Error; MAE – Mean Absolute Error; ICC – Intra Class Correlation.
  3. MFP Multivariable fractional polynomials.