Health state utility values derived from EQ-5D in psoriatic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background To determine pooled EQ-5D utility scores for psoriasis as a general condition, plaque psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis.Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of EQ-5D utility scores for psoriatic patients was conducted. Univariate meta-regression was used to explore the degree of heterogeneity.Results Seventy-five studies were included in the systematic review. The EQ-5D in psoriatic patients demonstrated decent convergent, known-groups validity, and a degree of responsiveness with a ceiling effect. Among the five EQ-5D dimensions, ‘self-care’ showed the lowest and ‘pain/discomfort’ showed the highest percentages of reporting any problems. For meta-analysis, we identified 70 utility scores from 59 studies: 22 for plaque psoriasis, 26 for psoriasis as a general condition, and 22 for psoriatic arthritis. The mean (95% CIs; I2) of the EQ-5D utility scores for psoriasis as a general condition, plaque psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis was 0.748 (0.718, 0.777; 98.8%), 0.755 (0.727, 0.783; 98.6%), and 0.585 (0.538, 0.632; 98.2%), respectively. For psoriasis as a general condition and plaque psoriasis, factors such as country, psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), dermatology life quality index (DLQI) and questionnaire version (EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-5L) all significantly influenced the utility scores.Conclusion Psoriasis imposes a substantial impairment on patients’ quality of life, especially the pain/discomfort dimension. Heterogeneity exists among different EQ-5D utility values found in the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.031 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".