Skip to main content

Table 4 Measuring agreement between the PROMs

From: A longitudinal validation of the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS stand-alone component utilising the Oxford Hip Score in the Australian hip arthroplasty population

  

EQ-5D-5L vs OHS

EQ-VAS vs OHS

Preoperative

Krippendorff’s alpha

0.704 (0.648, 0.752)—substantial

0.382 (0.289, 0.465)—fair

ICC

0.827 (0.787, 0.859)—good

0.553 (0.450, 0.636)—moderate

CCC

0.704 (0.652, 0.756)—moderate

0.381 (0.292, 0.469)—poor

6 weeks

Krippendorff’s alpha

0.640 (0.575, 0.697)—substantial

0.519 (0.439, 0.590)—moderate

ICC

0.781 (0.731, 0.822)—good

0.684 (0.611, 0.743)—moderate

CCC

0.640 (0.579, 0.701)—moderate

0.519 (0.443, 0.594)—moderate

6 months

Krippendorff’s alpha

0.658 (0.583, 0.719)—substantial

0.462 (0.361, 0.550)—acceptable

ICC

0.793 (0.737, 0.837)—good

0.632 (0.532, 0.710)—moderate

CCC

0.656 (0.588, 0.725)—moderate

0.461 (0.366, 0.555)—poor

  1. PROMs patient related outcome measures, OHS Oxford Hip Score, EQ5D-5L EQ-5D-5L utility index score, EQ-VAS Visual analogue score of the EQ-5D-5L, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient, CCC Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient