IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/yor/hectdg/16-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differential item functioning in the EQ-5D: An exploratory analysis using anchoring vignettes

Author

Listed:
  • Knott, R.
  • Lorgelly, P.
  • Black, N.
  • Hollingsworth, B.

Abstract

Inter-group comparisons using the EQ-5D, or any self-reported measure of health, rely on the measure being an accurate reflection of the true health of the groups or individuals concerned. However, responses to questions on subjective scales, such as those used in the EQ-5D, will be inaccurate if groups of individuals systematically differ in their use of the response categories, a phenomenon known as differential item functioning(DIF). This paper reports on an exploratory analysis involving the use of anchoring vignettes to identify differential item functioning (DIF) in the EQ-5D-5L. We demonstrate that using vignettes to appropriately identify DIF in EQ-5D reporting is possible, at least in certain age groups. We find that the EQ-5D is indeed subject to DIF, and that failure to account for DIF can lead to conclusions that are misleading when using the instrument to compare health or quality of life across heterogeneous groups. For instance, when adjusting for DIF in a sample aged 55-65 years, we found that differences between the highest and lowest education groups doubled in value afteradjusting for DIF, and increased from quantities that would not have had relevance in a clinical settings to ones that would (based on a suggested minimally important difference). Thus, our research provides evidence that the EQ-5D should be used with caution when comparing health or quality of life across heterogeneous groups. We also provide several important insights in terms of the identifying assumptions of response consistency and vignette equivalence.

Suggested Citation

  • Knott, R. & Lorgelly, P. & Black, N. & Hollingsworth, B., 2016. "Differential item functioning in the EQ-5D: An exploratory analysis using anchoring vignettes," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
  • Handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:16/14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/economics/documents/hedg/workingpapers/1614.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Franco Peracchi & Claudio Rossetti, 2013. "The heterogeneous thresholds ordered response model: identification and inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(3), pages 703-722, June.
    2. Hendrik Jürges & Joachim Winter, 2013. "Are Anchoring Vignettes Ratings Sensitive To Vignette Age And Sex?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur Van Soest, 2013. "Are A mericans Really Less Happy with Their Incomes?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(1), pages 44-65, March.
    4. Rachel J. Knott & Nicole Black & Bruce Hollingsworth & Paula K. Lorgelly, 2017. "Response‐Scale Heterogeneity in the EQ‐5D," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 387-394, March.
    5. repec:cup:apsrev:v:98:y:2004:i:01:p:191-207_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur van Soest, 2007. "Vignettes and Self-Reports of Work Disability in the United States and the Netherlands," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 461-473, March.
    7. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell, 2008. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 351-375, March.
    8. Dolan, Paul & Kavetsos, Georgios & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2013. "Sick but satisfied: The impact of life and health satisfaction on choice between health scenarios," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 708-714.
    9. Viola Angelini & Danilo Cavapozzi & Luca Corazzini & Omar Paccagnella, 2014. "Do Danes and Italians Rate Life Satisfaction in the Same Way? Using Vignettes to Correct for Individual-Specific Scale Biases," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 76(5), pages 643-666, October.
    10. Teresa Bago d’Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O’Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Slipping Anchor?: Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 46(4), pages 875-906.
    11. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Education‐related inequity in healthcare with heterogeneous reporting of health," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 639-664, July.
    12. Kristensen, Nicolai & Johansson, Edvard, 2008. "New evidence on cross-country differences in job satisfaction using anchoring vignettes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 96-117, February.
    13. Teresa Molina, 2016. "Reporting Heterogeneity and Health Disparities Across Gender and Education Levels: Evidence From Four Countries," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(2), pages 295-323, April.
    14. Nancy Devlin & Paul Krabbe, 2013. "The development of new research methods for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 1-3, July.
    15. Bertoni, Marco, 2015. "Hungry today, unhappy tomorrow? Childhood hunger and subjective wellbeing later in life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 40-53.
    16. Jones, Andrew M. & Rice, Nigel & Robone, Silvana & Dias, Pedro Rosa, 2011. "Inequality and polarisation in health systems' responsiveness: A cross-country analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 616-625, July.
    17. Nancy J. Devlin & David Parkin & John Browne, 2010. "Patient‐reported outcome measures in the NHS: new methods for analysing and reporting EQ‐5D data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(8), pages 886-905, August.
    18. Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney, 2013. "A Pilot Discrete Choice Experiment to Explore Preferences for EQ-5D-5L Health States," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 287-298, June.
    19. Van de Poel, Ellen & Van Doorslaer, Eddy & O’Donnell, Owen, 2012. "Measurement of inequity in health care with heterogeneous response of use to need," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 676-689.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 11th September 2017
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2017-09-11 16:00:01

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rachel J. Knott & Nicole Black & Bruce Hollingsworth & Paula K. Lorgelly, 2017. "Response to comment by robone: Practical advice for the implementation of anchoring vignettes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 398-400, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Knott, Rachel J. & Lorgelly, Paula K. & Black, Nicole & Hollingsworth, Bruce, 2017. "Differential item functioning in quality of life measurement: An analysis using anchoring vignettes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 247-255.
    2. Devlin, N. & Lorgelly, P. & Herdman, M., 2019. "Can We Really Compare and Aggregate PRO Data Between People and Settings? Implications for Multi-Country Clinical Trials and HTA," Research Papers 002094, Office of Health Economics.
    3. Laura Rossouw & Teresa Bago d’Uva & Eddy Doorslaer, 2018. "Poor Health Reporting? Using Anchoring Vignettes to Uncover Health Disparities by Wealth and Race," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1935-1956, October.
    4. Bertoni, Marco, 2015. "Hungry today, unhappy tomorrow? Childhood hunger and subjective wellbeing later in life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 40-53.
    5. Fontaine, Xavier & Haywood, Luke, 2018. "On the comparison of group inequalities using subjective data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 17-21.
    6. Rachel J. Knott & Nicole Black & Bruce Hollingsworth & Paula K. Lorgelly, 2017. "Response‐Scale Heterogeneity in the EQ‐5D," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 387-394, March.
    7. Kaiser, Caspar, 2020. "Using memories to assess the intrapersonal comparability of wellbeing reports," EconStor Preprints 226218, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Eric Bonsang & Arthur Soest, 2012. "Satisfaction with Job and Income Among Older Individuals Across European Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 227-254, January.
    9. Omar Paccagnella, 2011. "Anchoring vignettes with sample selection due to non‐response," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 665-687, July.
    10. Andrew M. Jones; Nigel Rice, Silvana Robone; & Nigel Rice; & Silvana Robone:, 2012. "A comparison of parametric and non-parametric adjustments using vignettes for self-reported data," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    11. Kapteyn, Arie & Wah, Saw Htay, 2016. "Challenges to small and medium-size businesses in Myanmar: What are they and how do we know?," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-22.
    12. Harris, Mark N. & Knott, Rachel J. & Lorgelly, Paula K. & Rice, Nigel, 2020. "Using externally collected vignettes to account for reporting heterogeneity in survey self-assessment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    13. Zhang, Hao & Bago d’Uva, Teresa & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2015. "The gender health gap in China: A decomposition analysis," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 13-26.
    14. Viola Angelini & Danilo Cavapozzi & Luca Corazzini & Omar Paccagnella, 2012. "Age, Health and Life Satisfaction Among Older Europeans," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 293-308, January.
    15. Molina, Teresa, 2017. "Adjusting for heterogeneous response thresholds in cross-country comparisons of self-reported health," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 1-20.
    16. Rachel J. Knott & Nicole Black & Bruce Hollingsworth & Paula K. Lorgelly, 2017. "Response to comment by robone: Practical advice for the implementation of anchoring vignettes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 398-400, March.
    17. Datta Gupta, Nabanita & Kristensen, Nicolai & Pozzoli, Dario, 2010. "External validation of the use of vignettes in cross-country health studies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 854-865, July.
    18. William H. Greene & Mark N. Harris & Rachel J. Knott & Nigel Rice, 2021. "Specification and testing of hierarchical ordered response models with anchoring vignettes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 31-64, January.
    19. Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2012. "Scale-perception bias in the valuation of environmental risks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2607-2617, July.
    20. Corrado, L. & Weeks, M., 2010. "Identification Strategies in Survey Response Using Vignettes," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1031, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    differential item functioning; anchoring vignettes; EQ-5D; response consistency; vignette equivalence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • C19 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Other
    • C49 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Other

    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:yor:hectdg:16/14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jane Rawlings). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deyoruk.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.