IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v5y2012i1p21-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Test-Retest Reliability of an Interactive Voice Response Version of the EQ-5D in a Sample of Cancer Survivors

Author

Listed:
  • J. Lundy
  • Stephen Coons

Abstract

Background: Electronic data capture technologies, such as interactive voice response (IVR) systems, are emerging as important alternatives for collecting patient-reported outcome data. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability of an IVR version of the EQ-5D. Methods: Outpatient cancer clinic patients (n= 127) were asked to complete the IVR-based EQ-5D twice, 2 days apart. The analyses tested for mean differences (paired t-test) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) to assess measurement stability over time. Equivalence of the means was established if the 95% confidence interval (CI) was within the minimally important difference (MID) interval; namely −0.035 to 0.035 for the EQ-5D index and −3.0 to 3.0 for the visual analog scale (i.e. EQ VAS). Adequacy of the ICC was established by testing whether it differed from a value of 0.70. Results: Both administrations were completed per protocol by 114 subjects (EQ-5D index) and 110 subjects (EQ VAS). For the EQ-5D index, the means (SD) of the first and second administrations were 0.871 (0.14) and 0.871 (0.15), respectively. The 95% CI of the mean difference was −0.013, 0.013, within the equivalence interval. The ICC was 0.876 (95% lower bound of 0.826) and was significantly different from 0.70. The EQ VAS means (SD) were 81.3 (17.5) and 80.8 (17.5), respectively. The 95% CI of the mean difference was −0.598, 1.617, within the equivalence interval. The EQ VAS ICC was 0.944 (95% lower bound of 0.919) and was significantly greater than 0.70. Conclusion: This analysis provides substantial evidence that the scores obtained from the IVR version of the EQ-5D are reliable upon repeated administrations. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2012

Suggested Citation

  • J. Lundy & Stephen Coons, 2012. "Test-Retest Reliability of an Interactive Voice Response Version of the EQ-5D in a Sample of Cancer Survivors," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(1), pages 21-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:5:y:2012:i:1:p:21-26
    DOI: 10.2165/11595840-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11595840-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11595840-000000000-00000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:5:y:2012:i:1:p:21-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.