Literature DB >> 8161979

Developing and evaluating cross-cultural instruments from minimum requirements to optimal models.

M Bullinger1, R Anderson, D Cella, N Aaronson.   

Abstract

In the age of increased international collaboration in medical research, the necessity of having at hand cross-culturally applicable instruments for the assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in clinical trials has been voiced. Several important theoretical bases leading to cultural bias in HRQL measurement include differences in definitions of HRQL across national and cultural contexts, levels of observation relied upon to indicate HRQL states, and the significance or weight placed upon the various HRQL states or dimensions measured. Despite a growing literature on the development and evaluation of existing HRQL measures in other cultures, comprehensive sets of procedures or requirements for the international part of development and evaluation are lacking. This paper reviews major approaches to developing international HRQL measures, and discusses various methods and criteria that have been recommended for evaluating measurement equivalence in comparisons of research across national and cultural contexts. A summary of recent trends and advances in international HRQL assessment is presented.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8161979     DOI: 10.1007/bf00422219

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


  14 in total

1.  Quality of life bibliography and indexes.

Authors:  B Spilker; F R Molinek; K A Johnston; R L Simpson; H H Tilson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Comparative research in social epidemiology: measurement issues.

Authors:  W W Dressler; F E Viteri; A Chavez; G A Grell; J E Dos Santos
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.847

3.  Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation.

Authors:  R A Deyo; P Diehr; D L Patrick
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1991-08

Review 4.  Standards for validating health measures: definition and content.

Authors:  J E Ware
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

5.  Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments.

Authors:  G Guyatt; S Walter; G Norman
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

Review 6.  Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures.

Authors:  R D Hays; R Anderson; D Revicki
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Culture, illness, and care: clinical lessons from anthropologic and cross-cultural research.

Authors:  A Kleinman; L Eisenberg; B Good
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure.

Authors:  D F Cella; D S Tulsky; G Gray; B Sarafian; E Linn; A Bonomi; M Silberman; S B Yellen; P Winicour; J Brannon
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: a clarification.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; R A Deyo; M Charlson; M N Levine; A Mitchell
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  88 in total

1.  Factor analytic study of two questionnaires measuring oral health-related quality of life among children and adults in New Zealand, Germany and Poland.

Authors:  H Tapsoba; J P Deschamps; M H Leclercq
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Measuring quality of life: Is quality of life determined by expectations or experience?

Authors:  A J Carr; B Gibson; P G Robinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-05-19

3.  A method to select an instrument for measurement of HR-QOL for cross-cultural adaptation applied to dermatology.

Authors:  A G de Tiedra; J Mercadal; X Badía; J M Mascaró; R Lozano
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  A review of the progress towards developing health-related quality-of-life instruments for international clinical studies and outcomes research.

Authors:  R T Anderson; N K Aaronson; M Bullinger; W L McBee
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Marmamula Srinivas; Gullapalli N Rao
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Preliminary evidence on the measurement properties of the Chinese version of the Child Health Questionnaire, parent form (CHQ-pF50) and child form (CHQ-CF87).

Authors:  J Y Y Ng; J M Landgraf; C S W Chiu; N L Cheng; Y F Cheung
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Content validity, construct validity, and reliability of the WHOQOL-Bref in a population of Dutch adult psychiatric outpatients.

Authors:  Fons J Trompenaars; Erik D Masthoff; Guus L Van Heck; Paul P Hodiamont; Jolanda De Vries
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Relationships between demographic variables and quality of life in a population of Dutch adult psychiatric outpatients.

Authors:  Fons J Trompenaars; E D Masthoff; G L Van Heck; P P Hodiamont; J De Vries
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2005-07-15       Impact factor: 4.328

9.  Do the SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF measure the same constructs? Evidence from the Taiwan population*.

Authors:  I-Chan Huang; Albert W Wu; Constantine Frangakis
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Quality of life in obsessive-compulsive disorder: impact of the disorder and of treatment.

Authors:  Mythily Subramaniam; Pauline Soh; Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar; Louisa Picco; Siow Ann Chong
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 5.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.