It is an observational study based on the The Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register
Stockholm, Sweden
NCT Number: NCT06568029
The aim of this study is to investigate the construct validity (convergent and known-groups) and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, polyarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. The study is based on retrospective registry data from the Swedish Rheumatology Registry (SRQ).
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Observational
Stockholm, Sweden
Background
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to measure how patients themselves experience their health and health related quality of life (HRQoL) (Sveriges kommuner och regioner 2023). One of the most commonly used PROMs is EQ-5D, which is a generic instrument used to measure, value and compare health across symptoms and diagnoses (Devlin and Brooks 2017). When choosing a PROM to follow-up care from the patient perspective and to assess HRQoL in patients with rheumatic disease, it is important to know that the instrument is valid and responsive. An instrument with low validity and responsiveness might not capture and describe patients' health and changes in their health accurately. The aim of the study is therefore to investigate the validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L. The research questions are: 1. What is the construct validity of EQ-5D-3L in patients with rheumatic disease? 2. What is the responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L in patients with rheumatic disease?
Methodology
Study design and data collection
This study will assess the construct validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), polyarthritis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) based on retrospective registry data. The design of the study will follow the established guidelines from COSMIN on how to assess validity and responsiveness of PROMs (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019).
Construct validity refers to the degree to which an instrument measures the constructs it intends to measure (Fayers and Machin 2007). Construct validity will be assessed in two ways, convergent validity and known-groups validity. Convergent validity refers to how well the instrument under study (EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS) correlates with other outcome measures (Fayers and Machin 2007). Known-groups validity refers to how well the instrument can find differences between groups known to differ. Responsiveness refers to the ability of the instrument to capture change over time in the construct that is measured (Mokkink, Terwee et al. 2010).
Historical registry data from the Swedish Rheumatology Register (SRQ) will be used to assess the construct validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS. Data on EQ-5D-3L has been collected since 2008 (Ernstsson, Janssen et al. 2020) and the study will include data from 2008 until the time of data extraction. The analyses will be conducted independently for the different patient groups.
Ethical approval has been granted for the project (2023-04394-01).
Outcome measures
EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS (see text about intervention). DAS28, DAPSA, BASDAI, ASDAS. The Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) VAS questions (pain, fatigue, and global score)
Convergent validity EQ-5D-3L
Convergent validity will be assessed by testing hypotheses regarding the expected direction and magnitude of correlation between the EQ-5D-3L and the other outcome measures (see hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan). Constructs that are considered to be related are expected to have at least a moderate correlation and constructs that are considered to be similar are expected to have a strong correlation (Prinsen, Mokkink et al. 2018).
Known-groups validity EQ-5D-3L
In the assessment of known-groups validity, patients will be divided into groups for which there is an expected difference in HRQoL (see hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan). The groups represent patients with different levels of disease activity or functional ability.
Responsiveness EQ-5D-3L
Responsiveness will be assessed in two ways. One way is by assessing the relationship between individual changes in EQ-5D-3L index value and dimensions over time with changes in other outcome measures over the same time period (see hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan). The second way is to assess whether EQ-5D-3L can discriminate between patients who have improved over time and those that have not, based on changes in disease activity or functional ability. The relationship between changes in the EQ-5D-3L and changes in other outcome measures will be assessed by analysing the correlation between the changes in the variables between the two first measurements of each individual during the first year after diagnosis (see hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan).
To assess whether EQ-5D-3L can discriminate between patients who have improved and those that have not, the area under the receiver operating curve ROC curve (AUC) will be calculated. Patients will be considered to have improved based on results from the measures of disease activity (DAS28, DAPSA, ASDAS or BASDAI) and functional ability (BASFI and HAQ-DI) using criteria for what is defined as a response from previous studies (see hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan).
Convergent validity EQ VAS
Convergent validity of EQ VAS will be assessed with the same analyses used for EQ-5D-3L (see the section about convergent validity EQ-5D-3L and hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan).
Known-groups validity EQ VAS
Known-groups validity of EQ VAS will be assessed for the same groups as the EQ-5D-3L index (see section about Known-groups validity EQ-5D-3L and hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan).
Responsiveness EQ VAS
Responsiveness of EQ VAS will be assessed with the same analyses used for EQ-5D-3L (see the section about responsiveness EQ-5D-3L and hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan).
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
For the analyses of construct validity, the latest measurement will be used if the individual patients have multiple complete registrations with EQ-5D-3L and the other required measure. The hypotheses for responsiveness will be tested in patients with newly diagnosed disease (having the diagnosis for ≤12 months), as changes in disease activity are likely to be present in this group. For the analysis of responsiveness, the two first measurements during the first year will be used.
In the study, the validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L will be assessed. The EQ-5D-3L measures HRQoL and consists of two parts. The first part contains five questions about mobility, daily activities, self-care, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression (EuroQoL 1990, Brooks 1996). Each question can be answered with no problem (1), some/moderate problem (2) unable to perform certain activities/having extreme problems (3). The answers can be summarized in an index value based on an existing preference-based value set. In this study, the EQ-5D-3L value set by Dolan (Dolan 1997) will be used for the main analyses and a Swedish experience-based value set in a sensitivity analysis (Burström, Sun et al. 2014). For the EQ-5D-3L index, 1 represents full health and 0 represents a value equal to being dead. EQ VAS measures the persons health today on a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health) (EuroQoL 1990, Brooks 1996).
Other names: EQ-5D-3L
Time frame: One measurement per patient.The latest complete EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS measurements per patient during the period 2008-2024 is used for the analysis.
Convergent validity refers to how well the instrument under study (EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS) correlates with other outcome measures (Fayers and Machin 2007). According to COSMIN guidelines, convergent validity should be assessed by formulating and testing hypotheses regarding the expected direction and magnitude of the correlation between the measurement being studied (EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS) and other outcome measures measuring the same or similar constructs (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019). The constructs measured by the other outcome measures should be clearly described (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019). See hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan.
Time frame: One measurement per patient. The latest complete EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS measurements per patient during the period 2008-2024 is used for the analysis.
Known-groups validity refers to how well the instrument can find differences between groups known to differ. Known-groups validity should be assessed by formulating and testing hypotheses regarding expected directions and magnitude of the differences between subgroups (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019). See hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan.
Time frame: One year. The two first EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS measurements of patients with newly diagnosed disease (having the diagnosis for ≤12 months) during the first year for patients included during the period 2008-2024
Responsiveness refers to the ability of the instrument to capture change over time in the construct that is measured (Mokkink, Terwee et al. 2010). According to COSMIN guidelines, responsiveness can be assessed by comparing changes in EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS, with changes in other outcome measures, similar to convergent validity explained above (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019). The hypotheses should include the expected direction and magnitude of the correlations, and the constructs should be clearly described. Responsiveness can also be assessed by analysing weather EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS can discriminate between patients who have improved and those that have not, based on changes in another outcome, such as changes in disease activity or functional ability (Mokkink, Prinsen et al. 2019). See hypotheses in document Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan.
Karolinska Institutet
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT04402086
Adult Onset Still Disease, Ankylosing Spondylitis
New Haven, Connecticut, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02538341
Ankylosing Spondylitis, Ankylosis
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04402554
Ankylosing Spondylitis, Ankylosis
Clermont-Ferrand, France
View Trial DetailsNCT01768858
Ankylosing Spondylitis, Ankylosis
View Trial Details