PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to develop a cross-cultural adaptation and to evaluate the validity and reliability of a Spanish version of the Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia (QUALID) scale. METHODS: Observational and cross-sectional validation study. The QUALID was translated according to standardised procedures. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. The QUALID structure was assessed using a Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Inter-respondent (one rater asking two respondents) and inter-rater (two raters asking one respondent) reliability was assessed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The criterion validity (concurrent) was assessed by Spearman's correlation between the QUALID score and the QoL-Visual Analogue Scale (QoL-VAS) score. The construct validity (convergent) was assessed by Spearman's correlations between QUALID score and scores on the Pain-Visual Analogue Scale (Pain-VAS), on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home (NPI-NH). RESULTS: A total of 160 elderly residents and 152 respondents at 8 long-term care centres in the province of Girona (Spain) participated in the study. Results showed satisfactory levels of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients 0.74) and evidenced the multidimensionality of the scale. Three factors were identified (behavioural signs of discomfort, behavioural signs of social interaction and signs of negative affective mood). Acceptable inter-respondent reliability (ICC = 0.74) and high inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.95) were found. The QUALID score was associated with the QoL-VAS score, suggesting a good concurrent criterion validity, and also with the Pain-VAS, the MMSE and the NPI-NH scores, suggesting good construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: Our evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the QUALID indicates that it is a reliable and valid instrument with an adequate capacity to distinguish between different clinical status.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to develop a cross-cultural adaptation and to evaluate the validity and reliability of a Spanish version of the Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia (QUALID) scale. METHODS: Observational and cross-sectional validation study. The QUALID was translated according to standardised procedures. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. The QUALID structure was assessed using a Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Inter-respondent (one rater asking two respondents) and inter-rater (two raters asking one respondent) reliability was assessed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The criterion validity (concurrent) was assessed by Spearman's correlation between the QUALID score and the QoL-Visual Analogue Scale (QoL-VAS) score. The construct validity (convergent) was assessed by Spearman's correlations between QUALID score and scores on the Pain-Visual Analogue Scale (Pain-VAS), on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home (NPI-NH). RESULTS: A total of 160 elderly residents and 152 respondents at 8 long-term care centres in the province of Girona (Spain) participated in the study. Results showed satisfactory levels of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients 0.74) and evidenced the multidimensionality of the scale. Three factors were identified (behavioural signs of discomfort, behavioural signs of social interaction and signs of negative affective mood). Acceptable inter-respondent reliability (ICC = 0.74) and high inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.95) were found. The QUALID score was associated with the QoL-VAS score, suggesting a good concurrent criterion validity, and also with the Pain-VAS, the MMSE and the NPI-NH scores, suggesting good construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: Our evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the QUALID indicates that it is a reliable and valid instrument with an adequate capacity to distinguish between different clinical status.
Authors: Philip D Sloane; Sheryl Zimmerman; Christianna S Williams; Peter S Reed; Karminder S Gill; John S Preisser Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2005-10
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Cleusa P Ferri; Martin Prince; Carol Brayne; Henry Brodaty; Laura Fratiglioni; Mary Ganguli; Kathleen Hall; Kazuo Hasegawa; Hugh Hendrie; Yueqin Huang; Anthony Jorm; Colin Mathers; Paulo R Menezes; Elizabeth Rimmer; Marcia Scazufca Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: P J Whitehouse; J M Orgogozo; R E Becker; S Gauthier; M Pontecorvo; H Erzigkeit; S Rogers; R C Mohs; N Bodick; G Bruno; P Dal-Bianco Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 1997 Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: J Vilalta-Franch; M Lozano-Gallego; M Hernández-Ferrándiz; J Llinàs-Reglà; S López-Pousa; O L López Journal: Rev Neurol Date: 1999 Jul 1-15 Impact factor: 0.870
Authors: Quincy M Samus; Adam Rosenblatt; Cynthia Steele; Alva Baker; Michael Harper; Jason Brandt; Lawrence Mayer; Peter V Rabins; Constantine G Lyketsos Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2005-10
Authors: Aina Soler; Guillem Amer; Alicia Leiva; Joana Ripoll; María Angeles Llorente; Alfonso Leiva; Joana Maria Taltavull; Rosa Molina; Joan Llobera Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Leticia Sánchez-Valdeón; Elena Fernández-Martínez; Sara Loma-Ramos; Ana Isabel López-Alonso; Enrique Bayón Darkistade; Valentina Ladera Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2019-06-06
Authors: Alys W Griffiths; Sarah J Smith; Adam Martin; David Meads; Rachael Kelley; Claire A Surr Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 4.147