Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/106901
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKaambwa, B.-
dc.contributor.authorMpundu-Kaambwa, C.-
dc.contributor.authorAdams, R.-
dc.contributor.authorAppleton, S.-
dc.contributor.authorMartin, S.-
dc.contributor.authorWittert, G.-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationBehavioral Sleep Medicine, 2018; 16(5):448-470-
dc.identifier.issn1540-2002-
dc.identifier.issn1540-2010-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/106901-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To assess the suitability for use within economic evaluation of a widely used sleep-related instrument (the Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS]) by examining its convergent and discriminant validity with two widely used generic preference-based instruments (Short-Form 36 [SF-36] and the Assessment of Quality of Life 4 dimensions [AQoL-4D]). Methods: Data from a cross-section of 2,236 community-dwelling Australian men were analyzed. Convergent validity was investigated using Spearman’s correlation, intraclass correlation, and modified Bland-Altman plots, while discriminant validity was examined using Kruskal Wallis tests. Results: All instruments showed good discriminant validity. The ESS was weakly correlated to the Short Form 6 dimension, or SF-6D (derived from the SF-36) and AQoL-4D utilities (r = 0.20 and r = 0.19, respectively). Correlations between ESS and SF-36/AQoL-4D dimensions measuring the same construct were all in the hypothesized directions but also weak (range of absolute r = 0.00 to 0.18). The level of agreement between the ESS and AQoL-4D was the weakest, followed by that between the ESS and SF-6D. Moderate convergent validity was seen between the utilities. Conclusions: The lack of convergent validity between the ESS and the preference-based instruments shows that sleep-related constructs are not captured by the latter. The ESS has, however, demonstrated good discriminant validity comparable to that of the AQoL-4D and the SF-36/SF-6D and would therefore be equally useful for measuring subgroup differences within economic evaluation. We therefore recommend using the ESS within cost-effectiveness analysis as a complement to preference-based instruments in order to capture sleep-specific constructs not measured by the latter.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityBillingsley Kaambwa, Christine Mpundu-Kaambwa, Robert Adams, Sarah Appleton, Sean Martin and Gary Wittert-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis-
dc.rights© 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15402002.2016.1228647-
dc.subjectHumans-
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results-
dc.subjectPsychometrics-
dc.subjectQuality of Life-
dc.subjectAdult-
dc.subjectAged-
dc.subjectMiddle Aged-
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysis-
dc.subjectFemale-
dc.subjectMale-
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnaires-
dc.subjectSleepiness-
dc.titleSuitability of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) for economic evaluation: an assessment of its convergent and discriminant validity-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/15402002.2016.1228647-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidKaambwa, B. [0000-0002-2128-3404]-
dc.identifier.orcidAdams, R. [0000-0002-7572-0796]-
dc.identifier.orcidAppleton, S. [0000-0001-7292-9714]-
dc.identifier.orcidWittert, G. [0000-0001-6818-6065]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 3
Psychology publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.