Pan XF, Wang L, Pan A. Epidemiology and determinants of obesity in China. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9(6):373–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(21)00045-0.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Organization WH. Obesity [Available from: https://www.who.int/health-topics/obesity#tab=tab_1.

Qin X, Pan J. The medical cost attributable to obesity and overweight in China: Estimation based on longitudinal surveys. Health Econ. 2016;25(10):1291–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3217.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Karimi M, Brazier J, Health. Health-Related Quality of Life, and quality of life: what is the difference? PharmacoEconomics. 2016;34(7):645–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Agency EM. Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products 2005 [Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/reflection-paper-regulatory-guidance-use-health-related-quality-life-hrql-measures-evaluation_en.pdf.

Administration FaD. Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims 2009 [Available from: https://www.fda.gov/media/77832/download.

CADTH. Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies. : Canada 2021 [Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/guidelines-economic-evaluation-health-technologies-canada-0.

Assessment ENfHT. Practical considerations when critically assessing economic evaluations 2020 [Available from: https://www.eunethta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EUnetHTA-JA3WP6B2-5-Guidance-Critical-Assessment-EE_v1-0.pdf.

Mulhern BJ, Pan T, Norman R, Tran-Duy A, Hanmer J, Viney R, et al. Understanding the measurement relationship between EQ-5D-5L, PROMIS-29 and PROPr. Qual Life Res. 2023;32(11):3147–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03462-6.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Chen G, DunnGalvin A, Greenhawt M, Shaker M, Campbell DE. Deriving health utility indices from a food allergy quality-of-life questionnaire. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2021;32(8):1773–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/pai.13604.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Finch AP, Brazier JE, Mukuria C. What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews. The European Journal of Health Economics. 2018; (4).

Ramos-Go IJM, Oppe M, Slaap B, Busschbach J, Stolk E. Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value in Health. 2016;20(3):466–73.

Article  Google Scholar 

Rencz F, Gulacsi L, Drummond M, Golicki D, Rupel VP, Simon J et al. EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015. Qual life Research: Int J Qual life Aspects Treat care Rehabilitation. 2016; (11):25.

Rowen D, Azzabi Zouraq I, Chevrou-Severac H, Van Hout B. International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017.

Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan VH. EQ-5D scores for diabetes-related comorbidities. Value in Health. 2016:1002.

McDool E, Mukuria C, Brazier J. A comparison of the SF-6Dv2 and SF-6D UK Utility values in a mixed patient and healthy Population. PharmacoEconomics. 2021;39(8):929–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-021-01033-6.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Thuppal S, Markwell S, Crabtree T, Hazelrigg S. Comparison between the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D quality of life (QOL) questionnaires in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) undergoing lung volume reduction Surgery (LVRS). Qual Life Res. 2019;28(7):1885–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02123-x.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ye Z, Sun L, Wang Q. A head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-5 L and SF-6D in Chinese patients with low back pain. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17(1):57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1137-6.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kontodimopoulos N, Pappa E, Papadopoulos AA, Tountas Y, Niakas D, Comparing. SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities across groups differing in health status. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(1):87–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9420-8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Heslin M, Chua KC, Trevillion K, Nath S, Howard LM, Byford S. Psychometric properties of the five-level EuroQoL-5 dimension and short Form-6 dimension measures of health-related quality of life in a population of pregnant women with depression. BJPsych Open. 2019;5(6):e88. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2019.71.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Sayah FA, Qiu W, Xie F, Johnson JA. Comparative performance of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D index scores in adults with type 2 Diabetes. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(8):2057–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1559-8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yang F, Lau T, Lee E, Vathsala A, Chia KS, Luo N. Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal Disease (ESRD). Eur J Health Econ. 2015;16(9):1019–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-014-0664-7.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Abdin E, Chong SA, Seow E, Peh CX, Tan JH, Liu J, et al. A comparison of the reliability and validity of SF-6D, EQ-5D and HUI3 utility measures in patients with schizophrenia and patients with depression in Singapore. Psychiatry Res. 2019;274:400–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.02.077.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Xu RH, Dong D, Luo N, Wong EL, Wu Y, Yu S, et al. Evaluating the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D among patients with haemophilia. Eur J Health Econ. 2021;22(4):547–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01273-5.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yousefi M, Najafi S, Ghaffari S, Mahboub-Ahari A, Ghaderi H. Comparison of SF-6D and EQ-5D scores in patients with Breast Cancer. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2016;18(5):e23556. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.23556.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Nahvijou A, Safari H, Ameri H. Psychometric properties of the SF-6Dv2 in an Iranian Breast cancer population. Breast Cancer. 2021;28(4):937–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-021-01230-3.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kularatna S, Senanayake S, Gunawardena N, Graves N. Comparison of the EQ-5D 3L and the SF-6D (SF-36) contemporaneous utility scores in patients with chronic Kidney Disease in Sri Lanka: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2019;9(2):e024854. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024854.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Sakthong P, Munpan WA, Head-to-Head. Comparison of UK SF-6D and Thai and UK EQ-5D-5L value sets in Thai patients with chronic Diseases. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15(5):669–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-017-0320-3.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wu J, Han Y, Zhao FL, Zhou J, Chen Z, Sun H. Validation and comparison of EuroQoL-5 dimension (EQ-5D) and short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) among stable angina patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0156-6.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Petrou S, Hockley C. An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ. 2005;14(11):1169–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1006.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Shah HA, Dritsaki M, Pink J, Petrou S. Psychometric properties of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients diagnosed with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-016-0417-7.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Xie S, Wang D, Wu J, Liu C, Jiang W. Comparison of the measurement properties of SF-6Dv2 and EQ-5D-5L in a Chinese population health survey. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022;20(1):96. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-022-02003-y.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

China* ZB-FCM-AGotWGoOi. Effect of body Mass Index on all-cause mortality and incidence of Cardiovascular DiseasesReport for Meta-Analysis of prospective studies on optimal cut-off points of body Mass Index in Chinese adults. Biomedical and Environmental Sciences; 2002.

Zhang L, Wang Z, Wang X, Chen Z, Shao L, Tian Y, et al. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in China: results from a cross-sectional study of 441 thousand adults, 2012–2015 - ScienceDirect. Obes Res Clin Pract. 2020;14(2):119–26.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Eva-Maria G, Bernhard H, King MT, Richard N, Rosalie V, Virginie N et al. Test-retest reliability of Discrete Choice experiment for valuations of QLU-C10D Health states. Value in Health. 2018:S109830151830192X-.

Schmelkin PL. Measurement, design, and analysis: Measurement, design, and analysis:; 1991.

Xie S, Wu J, Chen G. Comparative performance and mapping algorithms between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 among the Chinese general population. Eur J Health Econ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-023-01566-x.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gamper EM, Holzner B, King MT, Norman R, Viney R, Nerich V, et al. Test-retest reliability of Discrete Choice experiment for valuations of QLU-C10D Health states. Value Health. 2018;21(8):958–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.11.012.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Luo N, Liu G, Li M, Guan H, Jin X, Rand-Hendriksen K. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L value set for China. Value Health. 2017;20(4):662–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.016.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Brazier JE, Mulhern BJ, Bjorner JB, Gandek B, Rowen D, Alonso J et al. Developing a New Version of the SF-6D health state classification system from the SF-36v2: SF-6Dv2. Med Care. 2020; 58.

Wu J, Xie S, He X, Chen G, Bai G, Feng D, et al. Valuation of SF-6Dv2 Health states in China using Time Trade-off and discrete-choice experiment with a duration dimension. PharmacoEconomics. 2021;39(5):521–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-020-00997-1.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2016; (2).

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33.

Sayah FA, Qiu W, Xie F, Johnson JA. Comparative performance of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D index scores in adults with type 2 Diabetes. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(8):2057–66.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989;27(3 Suppl). https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198903001-00015. S178-89.

Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155–9. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar