✦ LIBER ✦

Comparing the sensitivity of EQ-5D, SF-6D and 15D utilities to the specific effect of diabetic complications

✍ Scribed by Nick Kontodimopoulos; Evelina Pappa; Zinovia Chadjiapostolou; Eleni Arvanitaki; Angelos A. Papadopoulos; Dimitris Niakas

Publisher: Springer
Year: 2010
Tongue: French
Weight: 209 KB
Volume: 13
Category: Article
ISSN: 1618-7598
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-010-0290-y

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Comparison of preference-based utilities

Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS

✍ Knut Stavem; Stig S. Frøland; Kjell B. Hellum 📂 Article 📅 2005 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 200 KB

The comparative responsiveness of the EQ

The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis

✍ M. J. Harrison; L. M. Davies; N. J. Bansback; M. J. McCoy; S. M. M. Verstappen; 📂 Article 📅 2009 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 266 KB

Estimating health utilities in patients

Estimating health utilities in patients with asthma and COPD: evidence on the performance of EQ-5D and SF-6D

✍ A. Szende; N. K. Leidy; E. Ståhl; K. Svensson 📂 Article 📅 2008 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 338 KB

The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D

The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility discrepancies in chronic heart failure

✍ Nick Kontodimopoulos; Michalis Argiriou; Nikolaos Theakos; Dimitris Niakas 📂 Article 📅 2010 🏛 Springer 🌐 French ⚖ 233 KB

Comparison of the minimally important di

Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D

✍ Stephen J. Walters; John E. Brazier 📂 Article 📅 2005 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 236 KB

A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D acro

A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups

✍ John Brazier; Jennifer Roberts; Aki Tsuchiya; Jan Busschbach 📂 Article 📅 2004 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 180 KB

## Abstract As the number of preference‐based instruments grows, it becomes increasingly important to compare different preference‐based measures of health in order to inform an important debate on the choice of instrument. This paper presents a comparison of two of them, the EQ‐5D and the SF‐6D (r