CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF THE EQ-5D-5L IN CUTANEOUS LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS: A SECONDARY DATA ANALYSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PV067 / #449 Poster Topic: AS07 - Cutaneous Lupus Background/Purpose Cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) significantly impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) is a widely used HRQoL measure, its psychometric properties in CLE have not been previously investigated. Given the important role of the EQ-5D-5L in health technology assessments (HTA), establishing the validity of this instrument is crucial for accurately reflecting health status and treatment effects in CLE, thereby guiding clinical and HTA decision making and improving patient care. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the construct validity of the EQ-5D-5L in people with CLE. Methods This was a secondary analysis of data from a prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter, multinational study assessing pruritis in participants with CLE.[1] Outcome measures included the EQ-5D-5L, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index-Activity Scale (CLASI-A), Worst Itch Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Worst Pain NRS, and the 12-item Pruritus Severity Scale (12-PSS). Descriptive analyses were performed on all demographic and disease characteristic variables. Convergent validity was assessed by examining correlations between the EQ-5D-5L domains and derived EQ-5D-5L index value with other disease-specific measures. Known-groups validity was evaluated by analyzing whether the EQ-5D-5L captured expected differences among participant groups with different CLASI-A severity levels: mild (score 0-9), moderate (10-20), and severe (21-70). Results A total of 149 people with CLE were included in the study; 75% were female and 79% were Caucasian/White, with a mean (SD) age of 49.6 (15.5) years. Mean (SD) CLASI-A score was 7.35 (7.77; n = 134) and EQ-5D-5L index value was 0.81 (0.21; n = 137). The EQ-5D-5L index value showed statistically significant low moderate (with CLASI-A and Worst Itch NRS) to high moderate (with DLQI, 12-PSS, and Worst Pain NRS) correlations with select reference variables. The known-groups hypothesis was confirmed with a medium effect size of η² = 0.11. Only the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety/Depression domains demonstrated statistically significant low moderate to high moderate correlations with at least 2 reference variables. The known-groups hypothesis was confirmed for the Self-Care, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression domains with small to medium η² effect sizes (0.05 ≤ η² ≤ 0.08). Sensitivity analyses, excluding 5 outliers, resulted in the disappearance of all high moderate correlations of the EQ-5D-5L domains and derived EQ-5D-5L index value. Only the known-groups hypothesis of the EQ-5D-5L index value and the Self-Care domain remained confirmed, but with a diminished small (η² = 0.06) and medium (η² = 0.10) effect size. Conclusions This study is the first to investigate the construct validity of the EQ-5D-5L in CLE, indicating moderate convergent and known-groups validity. However, sensitivity analysis results were notably weaker, compromising the robustness of the findings and suggesting potential limitations in the ability of the EQ-5D-5L measure to fully capture all health status dimensions relevant to CLE. Further psychometric studies are warranted to determine the overall appropriateness of the EQ-5D-5L in CLE. References: [1.] Samotij D. Lupus 2021;30:1385-93. Funding: The healthcare business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany (CrossRef Funder ID: 10.13039/100009945) funded the study and editorial support by Bioscript Group.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".