The EQ-5D and EQ-HWB fit the perceptions of quality of life from a Chinese perspective: a concept mapping study.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Yifan Ding, Zhuxin Mao, Zhihao Yang, Siliu Feng, Jan Busschbach
{"title":"The EQ-5D and EQ-HWB fit the perceptions of quality of life from a Chinese perspective: a concept mapping study.","authors":"Yifan Ding, Zhuxin Mao, Zhihao Yang, Siliu Feng, Jan Busschbach","doi":"10.1186/s12955-025-02361-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The escalating globalization of health assessments underscores a pivotal challenge: Do Quality of Life (QoL) instruments, developed primarily in Western contexts, accurately reflect the perspectives of non-Western populations? This study evaluates the alignment of EQ-5D and EQ-HWB items with QoL dimensions identified in Chinese literature, and compares QoL perceptions between Chinese residents and those living abroad who may be influenced by Western values.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study employed three successive rounds of participant recruitment to refine the concept mapping process. Initially, 13 bilingual QoL experts in the Netherlands piloted the methodology, providing feedback on item translation and expression. Subsequently, 18 Chinese expatriates in the Netherlands, with partial education abroad, reviewed the revised materials to represent perspectives influenced by Western culture. Finally, 20 native Chinese residents, who were born and educated in China, formed the target group. Utilizing feedback from the pilot stage, a pool of 54 QoL items derived from Chinese literature, plus an additional eight from the EQ-HWB, were assembled. The Group Concept Mapping (GCM) method was used, with participants organizing the items to reflect their interrelationships. Data were analyzed via Groupwisdom™, an online tool supporting multidimensional scaling (MDS) and cluster analysis, culminating in visual cluster rating maps that highlighted the item associations and groupings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In China, a five-cluster MDS map was identified: personal abilities, family and society, physical health, mental health, and self-cognition (stress value: 0.183), with physical health prioritized. Abroad, four clusters appeared: mental health, social connections, daily activities, and physical function (stress value: 0.185), prioritizing social connections. The EQ-5D missed the \"family and society\" cluster in China and \"social connections\" abroad. In contrast, the EQ-HWB covered all clusters in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EQ-5D items align well with the somatic and partially with the mental clusters, while the EQ-HWB also covers the adaptation cluster and the remaining mental cluster aspects. Both instruments reflect the QoL perceptions of Chinese individuals, although EQ-5D focuses more on health than overall well-being. Cultural differences affect priorities: participants in China value physical health most, whereas those abroad emphasize social connections.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"23 1","pages":"29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11959868/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-025-02361-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The escalating globalization of health assessments underscores a pivotal challenge: Do Quality of Life (QoL) instruments, developed primarily in Western contexts, accurately reflect the perspectives of non-Western populations? This study evaluates the alignment of EQ-5D and EQ-HWB items with QoL dimensions identified in Chinese literature, and compares QoL perceptions between Chinese residents and those living abroad who may be influenced by Western values.

Methods: This study employed three successive rounds of participant recruitment to refine the concept mapping process. Initially, 13 bilingual QoL experts in the Netherlands piloted the methodology, providing feedback on item translation and expression. Subsequently, 18 Chinese expatriates in the Netherlands, with partial education abroad, reviewed the revised materials to represent perspectives influenced by Western culture. Finally, 20 native Chinese residents, who were born and educated in China, formed the target group. Utilizing feedback from the pilot stage, a pool of 54 QoL items derived from Chinese literature, plus an additional eight from the EQ-HWB, were assembled. The Group Concept Mapping (GCM) method was used, with participants organizing the items to reflect their interrelationships. Data were analyzed via Groupwisdom™, an online tool supporting multidimensional scaling (MDS) and cluster analysis, culminating in visual cluster rating maps that highlighted the item associations and groupings.

Results: In China, a five-cluster MDS map was identified: personal abilities, family and society, physical health, mental health, and self-cognition (stress value: 0.183), with physical health prioritized. Abroad, four clusters appeared: mental health, social connections, daily activities, and physical function (stress value: 0.185), prioritizing social connections. The EQ-5D missed the "family and society" cluster in China and "social connections" abroad. In contrast, the EQ-HWB covered all clusters in both groups.

Conclusions: The EQ-5D items align well with the somatic and partially with the mental clusters, while the EQ-HWB also covers the adaptation cluster and the remaining mental cluster aspects. Both instruments reflect the QoL perceptions of Chinese individuals, although EQ-5D focuses more on health than overall well-being. Cultural differences affect priorities: participants in China value physical health most, whereas those abroad emphasize social connections.

EQ-5D和EQ-HWB符合中国人对生活质量的看法:一项概念图研究。
背景:不断升级的健康评估全球化强调了一个关键的挑战:主要在西方背景下开发的生活质量(QoL)工具是否准确地反映了非西方人群的观点?本研究评估了EQ-5D和EQ-HWB项目与中国文献中确定的生活质量维度的一致性,并比较了中国居民和可能受西方价值观影响的海外居民对生活质量的看法。方法:本研究采用连续三轮的被试招募来完善概念映射过程。最初,荷兰的13名双语生活质量专家对该方法进行了试点,对项目的翻译和表达提供反馈。随后,18名在荷兰接受过部分海外教育的中国侨民对修订后的材料进行了审查,以表达受西方文化影响的观点。最后,20名在中国出生和受教育的中国本土居民组成了目标群体。利用试点阶段的反馈,收集了来自中国文献的54个生活质量项目,以及来自EQ-HWB的另外8个项目。使用群体概念映射(GCM)方法,参与者组织项目以反映他们的相互关系。数据通过支持多维缩放(MDS)和聚类分析的在线工具Groupwisdom™进行分析,最终生成突出显示项目关联和分组的可视化聚类评级图。结果:在中国,确定了一个五聚类MDS图谱:个人能力、家庭和社会、身体健康、心理健康和自我认知(应激值:0.183),其中身体健康优先。在国外,出现了心理健康、社会联系、日常活动和身体功能四个集群(应激值为0.185),优先考虑社会联系。EQ-5D错过了中国的“家庭和社会”集群和国外的“社会关系”。相比之下,EQ-HWB覆盖了两组的所有集群。结论:EQ-5D项目与躯体集群契合度高,部分与心理集群契合度高,EQ-HWB项目也涵盖了适应集群和其余心理集群方面。这两项指标都反映了中国人对生活质量的看法,尽管EQ-5D更关注健康而不是整体幸福感。文化差异影响优先事项:中国参与者最重视身体健康,而国外参与者则强调社会关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信