Compares health outcome measures in a national population, indicating systematic discrepancies in health domains.
To compare correlation, agreement, and residual patterns between Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Health (GH) and EQ-5D-3 L and to identify areas of convergence and divergence across health domains in a nationally representative Korean population. A total of 2,699 adults completed PROMIS GH and EQ-5D-3 L between December 2021 and January 2022. A linear regression model was used to predict EQ-5D-3 L index values from PROMIS physical and mental health T-score. Agreement between predicted and observed EQ-5D values was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and root mean squared error (RMSE). Residuals between observed and predicted EQ-5D values were examined to detect systematic discrepancies across demographic, clinical subgroups, and EQ-5D domain severity levels. The relationship between PROMIS GH and EQ-5D showed consistent agreement (RMSE = 0.079). Approximately 9.8% of participants showed large discrepancies (absolute residual > 0.1) between observed and PROMIS-predicted EQ-5D values. Divergence was most pronounced in those with mobility, self-care, or usual activities problems, and poor PROMIS Physical Health was the strongest predictor of large discrepancies (Odds ratio = 3.68). PROMIS GH and EQ-5D-3 L showed overall agreement but also systematic discrepancies across subgroups. Larger differences were observed in individuals with functional limitations, particularly in mobility, self-care, and usual activities domains. These patterns suggest that the two instruments may capture related but not identical aspects of health.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: