Abstract
Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments are increasingly used as outcome variables in clinical trials, leading to a requirement for sample size calculations based on these variables. This paper aims to provide a guide to sample size calculations for use with the EuroQol-5D. The paper focuses on sample sizes required for comparative studies, and uses scores from two reference groups of general population and critically ill patients to determine sample sizes using the three parts of the EQ-5D (descriptive system, visual analogue scale (VAS), and EQ-5D index). The effect on sample sizes of different methods of categorising the three variables are compared, and comparisons are also made between sample sizes using parametric and non-parametric methods. Sample sizes required when the EQ-5D descriptive system is used as a binary variable (problems/no problems) are higher than or equal to those required when each dimension is categorised in three levels of severity (no problems, moderate problems, extreme problems). The use of three categories is appropriate in ill populations, though in more healthy populations two categories should be used. Due to the slight skewness of VAS data, and the equality of results using parametric and non-parametric methods, sample size calculations using the VAS should be based on a parametric approach. Sample sizes were considerably higher for the EQ-5D index when predefined intervals, as opposed to a score frequency based categorisation, were used with the general population reference group. Using the EQ-5D index in ill populations, it is recommended that sample size calculations are based on parametric methods, whilst in healthier populations non-parametric methods should be used.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Testa MA. Parallel perspectives on quality of life dur-ing antihypertensive therapy: Impact of responder, survey environment, and questionnaire structure. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993; 21 (suppl 2): S18-S25.
Larson TR, Blute ML, Bruskewitz RC, Mayer RD, Ugarte RR, Utz WJ. A high-efficiency microwave thermoablation system for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: Results of a randomized, sham-controlled, prospective, double-blind, multicenter clin-ical trial. Urology 1998; 5: 731–742.
Goossens ME, Rutten-Van-Molken MP, Kole-Snijders AM, Vlaeyen JW, Van-Breukelen G, Leidl R. Health economic assessment of behavioural rehabilitation in chronic low back pain: A randomised clinical trial. Health Economics 1998; 1: 39–51.
Julious SA, George S, Campbell MJ. Sample sizes for studies using the short form 36 (SF-36). J Epidemiol Community Health 1995; 49: 642–644.
Brooks R, EuroQol Group. EuroQol: The current state of play. Health policy 1996; 37: 53–72.
Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35: 1095–1108.
Ohinmaa A, Helala E, Sintonen H. Modeling EuroQol values of the Finnish adult population. In: Badia X, Herdman M, Segura A (eds). Proceedings of the 12th EuroQol Plenary Meeting, Barcelona, Oct 1995, pp. 67–76. ISP Report 95: 14.
Badia X, Roset M, Monserrat S, Herdman M. The Spanish VAS tari. based on valuations of EQ-5D health states from the general population. In: Rabin RE, Busschbach JJV, de Charro Fth, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ. EuroQol Plenary Meeting Rotterdam 1997. Discussion papers. Rotterdam: Centre for Health Policy and Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam: 93–114.
Badia X, Schiaffino A, Alonso J, Herdman M. Using the EuroQol 5-D in the Catalan general population: Feasibility and construct validity. Qual life Res 1998; 7: 311–322.
Badia X, Dõ az-Prieto A, Rue M, Patrick DL. Measuring health and health state preferences among critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22: 1379–1384.
Kazis LE, Jennifer JA, Meenan RF. Eect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989; 3: S178-S189.
Whitehead J. Sample size calculations for ordered categorical data. Stat Med 1993; 12: 2257–2271.
Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG. Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical and con-tinuous outcomes in two group comparisons. BMJ 1995; 311: 1145–1148.
Scott S, Goldberg M, Mayo N, Poitras B. Statistical Assesment of Ordinal Outcomes in Comparatives Studies. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 45–55.
Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Propor-tions, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley & sons, 1981.
McCullagh P. Regression models for ordinal data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1980; Series B, 43: 109–142.
Badia X, Schiaffino A, Alonso J, Herdman M. Using the EuroQol 5-D in the Catalan general population: feasibility and construct validity. Qual life Res 1998; 7: 311–322.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988.
Wan Y, Cohen J, Guerra R. A permutation test for the robust sib-pair linkage method. Ann Hum Genet 1997; 61: 79–87.
Sullivan LM, D'Agostino RB. Robustness of the t-test applied to data distorted from normality by floor effects.J Dent Res 1992; 71: 1938–1943.
McGuiness D, Bennett S, Riley E. Statistical analysis of highly skewed immune response data. J Immunol Methods 1997; 201: 99–114.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roset, M., Badia, X. & Mayo, N.E. Sample size calculations in studies using the EuroQol 5D. Qual Life Res 8, 539–549 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008973731515
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008973731515