Literature DB >> 12003052

A comparison of an electronic version of the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire to the standard paper version.

Judy M Ryan1, John R Corry, Robyn Attewell, Michael J Smithson.   

Abstract

Because of its sound psychometric properties the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire is used throughout the world, yet it is difficult to analyse and score. Using a newly developed software package, onto which any questionnaire can be loaded, we developed an electronic version of the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire. The purpose of this study is test the effect of the electronic mode of administration on the measurement properties of the SF-36. In a randomised cross-over design study 79 healthy individuals and 36 chronic pain patients completed both electronic and paper versions of the SF-36. Seventy-one percent preferred the electronic SF-36, 7% stated no preference, and 22% preferred the paper version. Completion time for the electronic SF-36 was slightly less, and there were no missing or problematical responses, whereas 44% of participants had at least one missing or problematical response in the paper version. Data entry and auditing time was 8 hours. There was less than 4% inter-version difference for any of the SF-36 sub-scales. The electronic SF-36 was well accepted and slightly quicker to complete than the paper version. We conclude that the electronic SF-36 is equivalent in performance and more effective than the paper version.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12003052     DOI: 10.1023/a:1014415709997

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  10 in total

1.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Dependence of weighted kappa coefficients on the number of categories.

Authors:  H Brenner; U Kliebsch
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Technology, experimentation, and the quality of survey data.

Authors:  D E Bloom
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-05-08       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  A comparison of the standard and the computerized versions of the Well-being Questionnaire (WBQ) and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ).

Authors:  F Pouwer; F J Snoek; H M van der Ploeg; R J Heine; A N Brand
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Advances in health status assessment. Overview of the conference.

Authors:  K N Lohr
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  A client-computer interface for questionnaire data.

Authors:  M E Maitland; A R Mandel
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.966

8.  Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires.

Authors:  G Velikova; E P Wright; A B Smith; A Cull; A Gould; D Forman; T Perren; M Stead; J Brown; P J Selby
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Electronic quality of life questionnaires: a comparison of pen-based electronic questionnaires with conventional paper in a gastrointestinal study.

Authors:  H E Drummond; S Ghosh; A Ferguson; D Brackenridge; B Tiplady
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs.

Authors:  C A McHorney; J E Ware; A E Raczek
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 2.983

  10 in total
  28 in total

1.  Feasibility and validity of a computer administered version of SEIQoL-DW.

Authors:  L Ring; A Kettis Lindblad; P Bendtsen; E Viklund; R Jansson; B Glimelius
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-09-13       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Validation of web-based administration of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12).

Authors:  Brent A Parnell; Gena C Dunivan; Annamarie Connolly; Mary L Jannelli; Ellen C Wells; Elizabeth J Geller
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment.

Authors:  Jakob Bue Bjorner; Chih-Hung Chang; David Thissen; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Crossover randomized controlled trial of the electronic version of the Chinese SF-36.

Authors:  Tian-hui Chen; Lu Li; Joerg M Sigle; Ya-ping Du; Hong-mei Wang; Jun Lei
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.066

5.  Practical and philosophical issues surrounding a national item bank: if we build it will they come?

Authors:  Dennis A Revicki; Jeff Sloan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-04-28       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Logistics of collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice: an overview and practical examples.

Authors:  Matthias Rose; Andrea Bezjak
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Quality of life amongst young adults with stroke living in Kenya.

Authors:  G Muli; A Rhoda
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.927

8.  Using latent trajectory analysis of residuals to detect response shift in general health among patients with multiple sclerosis. [corrected].

Authors:  Sara Ahmed; Nancy Mayo; Susan Scott; Ayse Kuspinar; Carolyn Schwartz
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  First Step in Telehealth Assessment: A Randomized Controlled Trial to Investigate the Effectiveness of an Electronic Case History Form for Dysphagia.

Authors:  Cagla Kantarcigil; Georgia A Malandraki
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2017-04-19       Impact factor: 3.438

10.  Outcome scores collected by touchscreen: medical audit as it should be in the 21st century?

Authors:  Sean Dixon; Timothy Bunker; Daniel Chan
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.891

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.