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