Psychometric analysis demonstrates strong construct validity and reliability in both patient and general populations, indicating promising outcomes.
The EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWBTM) tools have been developed to measure and value outcomes of both health and social care interventions, including those of carers, in a manner suitable for use in economic evaluation. The aim of this paper is to add to the body of psychometric evidence for the performance of EQ-HWB-25, and its shorter version EQ-HWB-9 by assessing construct validity and reliability. A sample of patients (n = 767) across six broadly defined health conditions and a sample of the general population (n = 302) completed the EQ-HWB measures alongside other measures. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman and Pearson correlations. Known-group validity was investigated by using several self-reported variables and disease specific questions for the patient sample. Test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic. Convergent validity between EQ-HWB items and related items from EQ-5D-5L, SWEMWBS and ICECAP-A was highest in the patient sample. At the scale level, the highest correlations of EQ-HWB-25 summative score and other measures were observed with both PHQ-8 and GAD-7 followed by EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-A. The EQ-HWB measures showed ability to detect differences in the defined known groups. Comparing across measures, the EQ-HWB measures had highest standardised effect sizes for groups defined by emotional problems. The EQ-HWB measures were found to be reliable with test-retest reliability being >0.8 for both groups. The results show that the EQ-HWB measures have promising psychometric properties across both the patient and general populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Keetharuth et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: