PURPOSE: This study proposes to identify for 5 widely used generic HRQL and QOL measures the extent to which function and global feelings of well-being are represented in their content. METHODS: The 5 indices were the EQ-5D, the HUI, the SF-36, SF-12, and the WHOQOL-Bref. A total of 15 raters with a variety of health and research backgrounds mapped the items. Raters independently identified all codes that could possibly map to the item and indicated the code that best reflected the underlying intent of the item, using the standardized mapping rules and methodology. A Delphi process aided consensus for each of the items. The consensus rounds involved reconsideration of item codes for which 70% of raters did not agree on the "best" code. These consensus rounds were terminated when item codes reached the threshold of 70% agreement or when it became evident from that consensus would not be reached. RESULTS: Function was a predominant construct for the 5 indices, with the proportion of items capturing function ranging from a low of 27% for the WHOQOL-Bref to a high of 92% for the SF-12. Less than 50% of items within the indices mapped to the granularity of function as described by the ICF. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates an additional method to validate the content of health-related indices to supplement the qualitative methods of consulting with experts and patients.
PURPOSE: This study proposes to identify for 5 widely used generic HRQL and QOL measures the extent to which function and global feelings of well-being are represented in their content. METHODS: The 5 indices were the EQ-5D, the HUI, the SF-36, SF-12, and the WHOQOL-Bref. A total of 15 raters with a variety of health and research backgrounds mapped the items. Raters independently identified all codes that could possibly map to the item and indicated the code that best reflected the underlying intent of the item, using the standardized mapping rules and methodology. A Delphi process aided consensus for each of the items. The consensus rounds involved reconsideration of item codes for which 70% of raters did not agree on the "best" code. These consensus rounds were terminated when item codes reached the threshold of 70% agreement or when it became evident from that consensus would not be reached. RESULTS: Function was a predominant construct for the 5 indices, with the proportion of items capturing function ranging from a low of 27% for the WHOQOL-Bref to a high of 92% for the SF-12. Less than 50% of items within the indices mapped to the granularity of function as described by the ICF. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates an additional method to validate the content of health-related indices to supplement the qualitative methods of consulting with experts and patients.
Authors: Nancy E Mayo; Lise Poissant; Sara Ahmed; Lois Finch; Johanne Higgins; Nancy M Salbach; Judith Soicher; Susan Jaglal Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2004-08-06 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: A Simon Pickard; Jeffrey A Johnson; David H Feeny; Ashfaq Shuaib; K C Carriere; Abdul M Nasser Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-01-15 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Margaret Rothman; Laurie Burke; Pennifer Erickson; Nancy Kline Leidy; Donald L Patrick; Charles D Petrie Journal: Value Health Date: 2009-09-25 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Friederike Lattig; Dieter Grob; Frank S Kleinstueck; François Porchet; Dezsö Jeszenszky; Viktor Bartanusz; David O'Riordan; Anne F Mannion Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-05-22 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Nancy E Mayo; Ala' Aburub; Marie-Josée Brouillette; Ayse Kuspinar; Carolina Moriello; Ana Maria Rodriguez; Susan Scott Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-12-17 Impact factor: 4.147