Administration-order effects in head-to-head comparisons of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L descriptive systems: evidence from a randomised general-population panel in Great Britain

Publication type

Journal Article

Authors

Publication date

October 22, 2026

Summary:

Purpose:
The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L are commonly compared within the same questionnaire, but answering one may influence responses to the other. We randomised administration order to estimate descriptive properties before exposure to the alternative version and quantify order effects.

Methods:
In Wave 11 of the Understanding Society Innovation Panel, respondents were randomised to the EQ-5D-5L-first condition (n = 952), the EQ-5D-3L-first condition (n = 961), or the EQ-5D-5L-only condition in the late questionnaire position (n = 983). Outcomes included the full-health ceiling, response distributions, and Shannon informativity.

Results:
When each version was answered in the early questionnaire position, the full-health ceiling was 52.1% for the EQ-5D-3L and 35.4% for the EQ-5D-5L (difference 16.7% points, 95% CI 12.2 to 21.3), and the EQ-5D-5L was more informative on every dimension. Moving the EQ-5D-5L to the late position without prior EQ-5D-3L exposure changed its ceiling by 2.5 points (95% CI -2.0 to 7.0), whereas prior EQ-5D-3L exposure at the same position raised it by 12.8 points (8.2 to 17.4). Among interviewer-present interviews, the EQ-5D-5L ceiling was 34.5% without prior EQ-5D-3L, 43.0% after the EQ-5D-3L without noticing repetition, and 53.2% among those who noticed.

Conclusion:
The EQ-5D-5L order effect arose predominantly from prior EQ-5D-3L exposure rather than questionnaire position and was stronger among respondents who noticed the repetition, consistent with response contamination. Studies comparing instruments within one questionnaire should randomise and report administration order.

Published in

Quality of Life Research

Volume

Volume: 35:311

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-026-04419-1

ISSN

09629343

Subjects

Notes

© The Author(s) 2026

Open Access

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

#589261

News

Latest findings, new research

Publications search

Search all research by subject and author

Podcasts

Researchers discuss their findings and what they mean for society

Projects

Background and context, methods and data, aims and outputs

Events

Conferences, seminars and workshops

Survey methodology

Specialist research, practice and study

Themes

Key research themes and areas of interest