522 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24857402)
21. A Head-to-Head Comparison of UK SF-6D and Thai and UK EQ-5D-5L Value Sets in Thai Patients with Chronic Diseases.
Sakthong P; Munpan W
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2017 Oct; 15(5):669-679. PubMed ID: 28290106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments.
Kontodimopoulos N; Aletras VH; Paliouras D; Niakas D
Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1151-7. PubMed ID: 19558372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Exploring the validity of estimating EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values from the health assessment questionnaire in patients with inflammatory arthritis.
Harrison MJ; Lunt M; Verstappen SM; Watson KD; Bansback NJ; Symmons DP
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2010 Feb; 8():21. PubMed ID: 20149253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. An empirical evaluation of the SF-12, SF-6D, EQ-5D and Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis of the hand.
Dritsaki M; Petrou S; Williams M; Lamb SE
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2017 Jan; 15(1):20. PubMed ID: 28118833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A comparison of measurement properties between UK SF-6D and English EQ-5D-5L and Thai EQ-5D-5L value sets in general Thai population.
Kangwanrattanakul K
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2021 Aug; 21(4):765-774. PubMed ID: 32981380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Is there a difference between EQ-5D and SF-6D in the clinical setting? a comparative study on the quality of life measured by AIMS2-SF, EQ-5D and SF-6D scales for osteoarthritis patients.
Zhang F; Yang Y; Huang T; Zhang Y; Zhao L; Li S
Int J Rheum Dis; 2018 Jun; 21(6):1185-1192. PubMed ID: 27463704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. A comparison of utility measurement using EQ-5D and SF-6D preference-based generic instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Salaffi F; Carotti M; Ciapetti A; Gasparini S; Grassi W
Clin Exp Rheumatol; 2011; 29(4):661-71. PubMed ID: 21813061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Psychometric assessment of EQ-5D-5L and ReQoL measures in patients with anxiety and depression: construct validity and responsiveness.
Franklin M; Enrique A; Palacios J; Richards D
Qual Life Res; 2021 Sep; 30(9):2633-2647. PubMed ID: 33835414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D, SF-6D and Diabetes Health Profile-18 in type 2 diabetes.
Mulhern B; Meadows K
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2014 Mar; 12():42. PubMed ID: 24661350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparing Generic and Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures in Epilepsy: EQ-5D-3L and NEWQOL-6D.
Mulhern B; Pink J; Rowen D; Borghs S; Butt T; Hughes D; Marson A; Brazier J
Value Health; 2017 Apr; 20(4):687-693. PubMed ID: 28408012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The psychometric performance of generic preference-based measures for patients with pressure ulcers.
Palfreyman S; Mulhern B
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2015 Aug; 13():117. PubMed ID: 26231179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparison of the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D in the general population of Chengdu city in China.
Zhao L; Liu X; Liu D; He Y; Liu Z; Li N
Medicine (Baltimore); 2019 Mar; 98(11):e14719. PubMed ID: 30882636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Discriminative validity of the EQ-5D-5 L and SF-12 in older adults with arthritis.
Tawiah AK; Al Sayah F; Ohinmaa A; Johnson JA
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2019 Apr; 17(1):68. PubMed ID: 30995930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Properties of patient-reported outcome measures in individuals following acute whiplash injury.
Pink J; Petrou S; Williamson E; Williams M; Lamb SE
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2014 Mar; 12():38. PubMed ID: 24625124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Evaluating a falls prevention intervention in older home care recipients: a comparison of SF-6D and EQ-5D.
Bjerk M; Brovold T; Davis JC; Bergland A
Qual Life Res; 2019 Dec; 28(12):3187-3195. PubMed ID: 31364036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with health complaints attributed to their amalgam fillings: a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing amalgam removal.
Lamu AN; Björkman L; Hamre HJ; Alræk T; Musial F; Robberstad B
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2021 Apr; 19(1):125. PubMed ID: 33865400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Psychometric properties of the five-level EuroQoL-5 dimension and Short Form-6 dimension measures of health-related quality of life in a population of pregnant women with depression.
Heslin M; Chua KC; Trevillion K; Nath S; Howard LM; Byford S
BJPsych Open; 2019 Oct; 5(6):e88. PubMed ID: 31588885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Psychometric Performance of the SF-6D Quality of Life Measure in an Outpatient Population with Bipolar Disorder.
Pogue YZ; Lavelle TA; Hodgkin D; Sylvia L; Ritter G; Nierenberg A
J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2022 Dec; 25(4):143-150. PubMed ID: 36535912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population.
Petrou S; Hockley C
Health Econ; 2005 Nov; 14(11):1169-89. PubMed ID: 15942981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Mapping between the Roland Morris Questionnaire and generic preference-based measures.
Khan KA; Madan J; Petrou S; Lamb SE
Value Health; 2014 Sep; 17(6):686-95. PubMed ID: 25236992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
