Evaluation of the American version of the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30)

Crispin Jenkinson, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S, Stephen Kennedy, Georgina Jones
Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2008 · vol. 17(9) , pp. 1147–1152 · doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9403-9 · PMID:18846435 · W2045705248
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 44 in-corpus citations
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06+body, 2026-06-28 ⓘ

This study evaluated the American version of the EHP-30 in 225 endometriosis patients, finding high data completeness, reliability, and supported psychometric properties in the US context.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-06 · read from full text ⓘ

This study evaluated the psychometric performance of the American version of the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) in a multi-centre Phase III randomized trial that enrolled 225 patients across 43 U.S. clinic sites, using baseline self-completed questionnaires from participants receiving depot medroxyprogesterone acetate or leuprolide acetate. Researchers assessed response rate, data completeness and quality, reliability, and whether scaling assumptions held, and found very high data completeness (97.33% completing all items, with no more than two missing responses per item) with no floor or ceiling effects across dimensions. Internal consistency reliability was high for all dimensions (Cronbach’s alpha 0.84–0.91), supporting the instrument’s previously established scaling and psychometric properties in an American context; the main limitation noted is that analyses used baseline data and combined treatment groups. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically, it validates the EHP-30 questionnaire for use in the USA.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

ObjectivesHealth status instruments, which measure the subjective functioning and well-being of respondents, are increasingly being used in international, multi-centre trials of new treatments. If the results of such trials in different countries are to be pooled, it is vitally important for researchers to know how comparable the instruments are across cultures. In this study, we evaluated the response rate, data quality, score reliability and scaling assumptions of the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) in the USA.MethodsData were obtained from a multi-centre study which recruited 225 patients from 43 clinic sites in the United States of America. It was a randomised, evaluator-blinded, Phase III study. In the evaluation of the EHP-30 reported here, the two groups (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate [DMPA] and Leuprolide Acetate [LA]) are combined, and analyses are based on the data gained at baseline. Questionnaires were self-completed by patients when they visited the clinics.ResultsData completeness was very high, with 97.33% of respondents completing all of the items on the EHP-30. Furthermore, there were no more than a maximum of two missing responses for any given item. No floor and ceiling effects were found for any of the dimensions of the questionnaire. Internal consistency reliability was high for all dimensions (alpha ranged from 0.84 to 0.91). The psychometric properties of the instrument, outlined in the development of the UK version, are supported in the American context.ConclusionsThe data presented here suggest that the EHP-30 is a valid and reliable measure that can be appropriately and meaningfully used in studies that include respondents from the USA.
Full text 6,868 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 6 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Objectives Health status instruments, which measure the subjective functioning and well-being of respondents, are increasingly being used in international, multi-centre trials of new treatments. If the results of such trials in different countries are to be pooled, it is vitally important for researchers to know how comparable the instruments are across cultures. In this study, we evaluated the response rate, data quality, score reliability and scaling assumptions of the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) in the USA.

Methods

Data were obtained from a multi-centre study which recruited 225 patients from 43 clinic sites in the United States of America. It was a randomised, evaluator-blinded, Phase III study. In the evaluation of the EHP-30 reported here, the two groups (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate [DMPA] and Leuprolide Acetate [LA]) are combined, and analyses are based on the data gained at baseline. Questionnaires were self-completed by patients when they visited the clinics.

Results

Data completeness was very high, with 97.33% of respondents completing all of the items on the EHP-30. Furthermore, there were no more than a maximum of two missing responses for any given item. No floor and ceiling effects were found for any of the dimensions of the questionnaire. Internal consistency reliability was high for all dimensions (alpha ranged from 0.84 to 0.91). The psychometric properties of the instrument, outlined in the development of the UK version, are supported in the American context.

Conclusions

The data presented here suggest that the EHP-30 is a valid and reliable measure that can be appropriately and meaningfully used in studies that include respondents from the USA. Similar content being viewed by others

References

Loge, J. H., Kaasa, S., Hjermstad, M. J., & Kvien, T. K. (1998). Translation and performance of the Norwegian SF-36 Health Survey in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. I. Data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability, and construct validity. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1069–1076. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00098-5. Jones, G., Kennedy, S., Barnard, A., Wong, J., & Jenkinson, C. (2001). Development of an endometriosis quality-of-life instrument: The Endometriosis Health Profile-30. Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 98, 258–264. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(01)01433-8. Hunt, S. M., McEwen, J., & McKenna, S. P. (1986). Measuring health status. Dover: Croom Helm. Ware, J. E. Jr, & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483. doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002. Jenkinson, C., Peto, V., Fitzpatrick, R., Greenhall, R., & Hyman, N. (1995). Self-reported functioning and well-being in patients with Parkinson’s disease: comparison of the short-form health survey (SF-36) and the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39). Age and Ageing, 24, 505–509. doi:10.1093/ageing/24.6.505. Laursen, B. S., Bajaj, P., Oleson, A. S., Delmar, C., & Arendt-Nielsen, L. (2005). Health related quality of life and quantitative pain measurement in females with chronic non-malignant pain. European Journal of Pain (London, England), 9, 267–275. doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.07.003. Burry, K. A. (1992). Nafarelin in the management of endometriosis: quality of life assessment. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 166, 735–739. Patrick, D. L., & Deyo, R. A. (1989). Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Medical Care, 27(3 Suppl), S217–S232. doi:10.1097/00005650-198903001-00018. Jones, G., Jenkinson, C., & Kennedy, S. (2001). The Endometriosis Health Profile user manual. Oxford: Oxford Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, and Health Services Research Unit, University of Oxford. Ware, J. E. Jr, Kosinsky, M., Bayliss, M. S., McHorney, C. A., Rogers, W. H., & Raczek, A. (1995). Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Medical Care, 33(4 Suppl), AS264–AS279. Jones, G., Jenkinson, C., Taylor, N., Mills, A., & Kennedy, S. (2006). Measuring quality of life in women with endometriosis: tests of data quality, score reliability, response rate and scaling assumptions of the Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire. Human Reproduction (Oxford, England), 21, 2686–2693. doi:10.1093/humrep/del231. Schlaff, W. D., Carson, S. A., Luciano, A., Ross, D., & Bergqvist, A. (2006). Subcutaneous injection of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate compared with leuprolide acetate in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain. Fertility and Sterility, 85, 314–325. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1315. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, vol 10, no 7. Available online at: http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n7.pdf. O’Mahony, P. G., Rodgers, H., Thomson, R. G., Dobson, R., & James, O. F. (1998). Is the SF-36 suitable for assessing health status of older stroke patients? Age and Ageing, 27, 19–22. doi:10.1093/ageing/27.1.19. Kline, P. (2000). A psychometrics primer. London: Free Association Books. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental health summary scores: a user’s manual. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center. Ware, J. E. Jr (1995). What information do consumers want and how will they use it?. Medical Care, 33, JS25–JS30. doi:10.1097/00005650-199501001-00005. Jenkinson, C., Fitzpatrick, R., Peto, V., Greenhall, R., & Hyman, N. (1997). The Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39): development and validation of a Parkinson’s disease summary index score. Age and Ageing, 26, 353–357. doi:10.1093/ageing/26.5.353.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Pfizer Inc. for permitting access to the data on which the analyses in this paper were based. Conflict of interest Crispin Jenkinson and Stephen Kennedy have acted as paid consultants to Pfizer Inc. Georgina Jones was employed on a grant made available by Pfizer Inc. Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Additional information Precis The Endometriosis Health Profile is an appropriate instrument to evaluate patient-reported health status in endometriosis in the American context. Rights and permissions About this article Cite this article Jenkinson, C., Kennedy, S. & Jones, G. Evaluation of the American version of the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30). Qual Life Res 17, 1147–1152 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9403-9 Received: Accepted: Published: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9403-9

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Endometriosis Health Status Surveys and Questionnaires Adult Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal Endometriosis Female Humans Leuprolide Leuprolide Leuprolide Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Psychometrics Quality of Life Severity of Illness Index United States

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (19)

Cited by (44)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-07-26T06:08:39.051465+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:14:24.299271+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-07-26T06:48:27.953686+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK