Comparing the measurement properties of the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O instruments in ages 50–70: a cross-sectional study on a representative sample of the Hungarian general population

Petra Baji, Miklos Farkas, Ágota Dobos, Zsombor Zrubka, Levente Kovács, László Gulácsi and Márta Péntek
Additional contact information
Ágota Dobos: Corvinus University of Budapest
Zsombor Zrubka: Óbuda University
Levente Kovács: Óbuda University
László Gulácsi: Óbuda University
Márta Péntek: Óbuda University

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2021, vol. 22, issue 9, No 10, 1453-1466

Abstract: Abstract Objective The ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O were validated as capability wellbeing measures of adults aged 18 + and 65 + years, respectively. We aimed to compare their measurement properties in age group 50–70. Methods Data were derived from a cross-sectional survey among a sample representative for the adult Hungarian population. Respondents aged between 50 and 70 filled in both the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O questionnaires. We assessed and compared feasibility, agreement, discriminatory power, convergent and content validity of the two instruments and explored the determinants of the differences between the two measures. Results 707 respondents (99.4%) provided full answers to both questionnaires (46.3% women, average age 60.1 years). The instruments showed similar construct and convergent validity and discriminatory power. Pearson-correlations between instrument items were strong (r > 0.5). ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O scores could be calculated from each other with a good confidence (R2 = 0.69 and 0.71). ICECAP-O scores (mean 0.87, SD = 0.12) were systematically higher than ICECAP-A scores (0.85, SD = 0.15) in most subgroups. The difference increased with the deterioration of capability and health, and with age. Regression results showed that employment and health status had larger marginal effect on the ICECAP-A than on the ICECAP-O scores, and these effects were larger than the effect of age on both measures. Conclusion Validity of both instruments was confirmed in the age groups 50–70. Given that employment and health status are important determinants of the differences between the two instruments besides age, the possibility of linking the choice between ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O to these factors should be investigated by further research.

Keywords: Capability; ICECAP-A; ICECAP-O; Validity; EQ-5D-5L (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I19 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01325-w Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01325-w

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01325-w

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().