OBJECTIVE: The characteristics of the 36 item Medical Outcome Short Form Health Study Survey (SF-36) questionnaire, designed as a generic indicator of health status for the general population, allow it to be self-administered or used in personal or telephone interviews. The main objective of the study was to compare the telephone and self-administered modes of SF-36 for a population from Girona (Spain). METHODS: A randomized crossover administration of the questionnaire design was used in a cardiovascular risk factor survey. Of 385 people invited to participate in the survey, 351 agreed to do so and were randomly assigned to two orders of administration (i.e., telephone-self and self-telephone); 261 completed both questionnaires. Scores were compared between administration modes using a paired t test. Internal consistency and agreement between modalities were analyzed by respectively applying Chronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients. The effect of the order of administration on the test-retest difference was analyzed by one-way ANOVA for repeated measurements. RESULTS:Physical function, physical role and social functioning received significantly lower scores when the self-administered questionnaire was used prior to the telephone survey. When the initial survey was conducted by telephone, all Chronbach's alpha coefficients (except social functioning) scored over 0.70 in the self-administered modality. The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.41 to 0.83 for the telephone-self order and from 0.32 to 0.73 for the self-telephone order. No clinically significant effect was observed for the order of application. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that the telephone-administration mode of SF-36 is equivalent to and as valid as the self-administered mode.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The characteristics of the 36 item Medical Outcome Short Form Health Study Survey (SF-36) questionnaire, designed as a generic indicator of health status for the general population, allow it to be self-administered or used in personal or telephone interviews. The main objective of the study was to compare the telephone and self-administered modes of SF-36 for a population from Girona (Spain). METHODS: A randomized crossover administration of the questionnaire design was used in a cardiovascular risk factor survey. Of 385 people invited to participate in the survey, 351 agreed to do so and were randomly assigned to two orders of administration (i.e., telephone-self and self-telephone); 261 completed both questionnaires. Scores were compared between administration modes using a paired t test. Internal consistency and agreement between modalities were analyzed by respectively applying Chronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients. The effect of the order of administration on the test-retest difference was analyzed by one-way ANOVA for repeated measurements. RESULTS: Physical function, physical role and social functioning received significantly lower scores when the self-administered questionnaire was used prior to the telephone survey. When the initial survey was conducted by telephone, all Chronbach's alpha coefficients (except social functioning) scored over 0.70 in the self-administered modality. The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.41 to 0.83 for the telephone-self order and from 0.32 to 0.73 for the self-telephone order. No clinically significant effect was observed for the order of application. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that the telephone-administration mode of SF-36 is equivalent to and as valid as the self-administered mode.
Authors: Teresa Balboa-Castillo; Luz M León-Muñoz; Auxiliadora Graciani; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo; Pilar Guallar-Castillón Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Sarah Batawi; Nehal Tarazan; Rajaa Al-Raddadi; Eman Al Qasim; Anees Sindi; Sameera Al Johni; Fahad M Al-Hameed; Yaseen M Arabi; Timothy M Uyeki; Basem M Alraddadi Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Sara Padovani; Maurizia Capuzzo; Leo Massari; Gaetano Caruso; Paolo Arrigoni; Carlo Zaolino; Davide Cucchi; Giorgia Valpiani; Alessandra Colozza Journal: JSES Int Date: 2021-02-06
Authors: Margitta Lungenhausen; Stefan Lange; Christoph Maier; Claudia Schaub; Hans J Trampisch; Heinz G Endres Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2007-11-22 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Yaoyue Hu; Hynek Pikhart; Ruzena Kubinova; Sofia Malyutina; Andrzej Pajak; Agnieszka Besala; Steven Bell; Anne Peasey; Michael Marmot; Martin Bobak Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 6.053