CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 161Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeTreatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and Access

Usefulness of EQ-5D in assessing health status in primary care patients with major depressive disorder

Open access
Sapin·2004·Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
DOI 10.1186/1477-7525-2-20PMC PMC416488
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent psychiatric disorder associated with impaired patient functioning and reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQL). The present study describes the impact of MDD on patients' HRQL and examines preference-based health state differences by patient features and clinical characteristics. METHODS: 95 French primary care practitioners recruited 250 patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of MDD for inclusion in an eight-week follow-up cohort. Patient assessments included the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI), the Short Form-36 Item scale (SF-36), the Quality of Life Depression Scale (QLDS) and the EuroQoL (EQ-5D). RESULTS: The mean EQ-5D utility at baseline was 0.33, and 8% of patients rated their health state as worse than death. There were no statistically significant differences in utilities by demographic features. Significant differences were found in mean utilities by level of disease severity assessed by CGI. The different clinical response profiles, assessed by MADRS, were also revealed by EQ-5D at endpoint: 0.85 for responders remitters, 0.72 for responders non-remitter, and 0.58 for non-responders. Even if HRQL and EQ-5D were moderately correlated, they shared only 40% of variance between baseline and endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported patient valuations for depression are important patient-reported outcomes for cost-effectiveness evaluations of new antidepressant compounds and help in further understanding patient compliance with antidepressant treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1477-7525-2-20

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Preference-based utilities derived from the EQ-5D-5L are suitable for calculating quality-adjusted life-years in the field of depression.

    “This approach is evaluated suitable for this purpose in the field of depression (Lamers et al., 2006; Sapin et al., 2004).”

    From The efficacy of automated feedback after internet-based depression screening: Study protocol of the German, three-armed, randomised controlled trial DISCOVER (2021) · cites this paper as Sapin et al., 2004

    The Discussion says utility scores are needed to calculate QALYs and that the EQ-5D measure can be applied to cost-utility analyses of depression treatments. However, the Data collection section specifies three response levels per dimension, not the five-level EQ-5D-5L named in the claim. Page numbers are not available in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sapin
Venue
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2004
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
20
ISSN
1477-7525 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1477-7525-2-20
PMC
PMC416488
OpenAlex
W2146743061
Cited by
161
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 5
FWCI
20.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
H. Lundbeck A/S
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
major depressive disorder, EQ-5D, health-related quality of life, health utility, patient-reported outcomes, primary care, disease severity, treatment response, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Major Depressive Disorder, Family Practice, Female, France, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Sickness Impact Profile

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review