Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2013

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

Auteurs: Vijaya K. Gothwal, Marmamula Srinivas, Gullapalli N. Rao

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 4/2013

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

To examine the psychometric characteristics of the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument—modified Indian version (modified WHOQOL) and its subscales in adults with visual impairment (VI) using Rasch analysis.

Methods

Cross-sectional data were of people aged ≥40 years with VI (n = 1,333) who responded to the modified WHOQOL in the Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study, India. Rasch analysis was used to explore the instrument and its subscales for key indices such as measurement precision by person separation reliability, PSR (i.e., discrimination between strata of participants’ health-related QOL [HRQOL], recommended minimum value 0.8), unidimensionality (i.e., measurement of a single construct), and targeting (i.e., matching of item difficulty to participants’ HRQOL).

Results

Rasch-guided iterative approach including category re-organization to enable threshold ordering and item deletion to overcome multidimensionality resulted in a unidimensional 9-item WHOQOL and a 6-item level of independence (LOI) subscale with adequate PSR (0.81 and 0.82, respectively). Targeting was sub-optimal for both (−1.58 logits for WHOQOL and −2.55 logits for the subscale). Remaining subscales were dysfunctional.

Conclusions

The WHOQOL and LOI subscale can be improved and shortened, and the Rasch-revised versions are likely to assess the HROQL of VI patients best because of their brevity, reliability, and unidimensionality.
vorige artikel Measurement of individualised quality of life amongst young people with indicated personality disorder during emerging adulthood using the SEIQoL-DW
volgende artikel Evaluation of content on EQ-5D as compared to disease-specific utility measures
Literatuur
1.
WHOQOL Group. (1994). The development of the WHO quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). In:J. Orley, W. Kukyen (Eds.), Quality of life assessment: International perspectives. Heidelberg: Springer.
2.
WHOQOL Group. (1993). Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). Quality of Life Research, 2, 153–159.CrossRef
3.
WHOQOL Group. (1994). Development of the WHOQOL: rationale and current status. International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 24–56.
4.
Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M., & O’Connell, K. A. (2004). The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Quality of Life Research, 13(2), 299–310.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Saxena, S., Chandiramani, K., & Bhargava, R. (1998). WHOQOL-Hindi: a questionnaire for assessing quality of life in health care settings in India. World Health Organization Quality of Life. National Medical Journal of India, 11(4), 160–165.PubMed
6.
Bullinger, M., Anderson, R., Cella, D., & Aaronson, N. (1993). Developing and evaluating cross-cultural instruments from minimum requirements to optimal models. Quality of Life Research, 2(6), 451–459.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Dandona, R., Dandona, L., McCarty, C. A., & Rao, G. N. (2000). Adaptation of WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument to develop a vision-specific instrument. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 48(1), 65–70.PubMed
8.
Nutheti, R., Shamanna, B. R., Nirmalan, P. K., Keeffe, J. E., Krishnaiah, S., Rao, G. N., et al. (2006). Impact of impaired vision and eye disease on quality of life in Andhra Pradesh. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 47(11), 4742–4748.CrossRef
9.
Dandona, R., Dandona, L., Naduvilath, T. J., Nanda, A., & McCarty, C. A. (1997). Design of a population-based study of visual impairment in India: the Andhra Pradesh eye disease study. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 45, 251–257.PubMed
10.
Lee K., Ashton M. C. (2007). Factor analysis in personality research. In: R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 424–443). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
11.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2009). Cataract symptom scale: clarifying measurement. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 93(12), 1652–1656.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., Lundstrom, M., & Pesudovs, K. (2009). Catquest questionnaire: re-validation in an Australian cataract population. Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, 37(8), 785–794.CrossRef
13.
14.
Hambleton R. K. (2000). Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis. Medicine Care 38(9 Suppl), II60–II65.
15.
Pesudovs, K. (2006). Patient-centred measurement in ophthalmology–a paradigm shift. BMC Ophthalmology, 6, 25.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Andrich, D. A. (1978). A rating scale formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561–573.CrossRef
17.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
Pallant, J. F., Miller, R. L., & Tennant, A. (2006). Evaluation of the Edinburgh Post natal Depression Scale using Rasch analysis. BMC Psychiatry, 6, 28.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Tennant, A., & Conaghan, P. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis and Rheumatism, 57(8), 1358–1362.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Tennant, A., Penta, M., Tesio, L., Grimby, G., Thonnard, J. L., Slade, A., et al. (2004). Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PRO-ESOR project. Medical Care, 42(1 Suppl), I37–I48.PubMed
21.
Norquist, J. M., Fitzpatrick, R., Dawson, J., & Jenkinson, C. (2004). Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Medical Care, 42(1 Suppl), I25–I36.PubMed
22.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2010). Activities of daily vision scale: what do the subscales measure? Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 51(2), 694–700.CrossRef
23.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2009). Rasch analysis of visual function and quality of life questionnaires. Optometry and Vision Science, 86(10), 1160–1168.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2009). Visual activities questionnaire: assessment of subscale validity for cataract surgery outcomes. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 35(11), 1961–1969.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2010). Measuring outcomes of cataract surgery using the Visual Function Index-14. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 36(7), 1181–1188.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Pesudovs, K., Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T., & Lamoureux, E. L. (2010). Remediating serious flaws in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 36(5), 718–732.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Naduvilath, T. J., McCarty, C. A., Nanda, A., Srinivas, M., et al. (1998). Is current eye-care-policy focus almost exclusively on cataract adequate to deal with blindness in India? Lancet, 351(9112), 1312–1316.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Naduvilath, T. J., McCarty, C. A., Srinivas, M., Mandal, P., et al. (1999). Burden of moderate visual impairment in an urban population in southern India. Ophthalmology, 106(3), 497–504.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Srinivas, M., Giridhar, P., Vilas, K., Prasad, M. N., et al. (2001). Blindness in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 42(5), 908–916.
30.
Dandona, R., Dandona, L., Srinivas, M., Giridhar, P., Prasad, M. N., Vilas, K., et al. (2002). Moderate visual impairment in India: the Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 86(4), 373–377.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Ferris, F. L., 3rd, Kassoff, A., Bresnick, G. H., & Bailey, I. (1982). New visual acuity charts for clinical research. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 94(1), 91–96.PubMed
32.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Institute of Educational Research.
33.
Linacre, J. M. (2008). WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer program. Chicago: Winsteps.com.
34.
Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press.
35.
Gothwal, V. K., Wright, T. A., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2009). Rasch analysis of the quality of life and vision function questionnaire. Optometry and Vision Science, 86(7), E836–E844.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Linacre, J. M. (2002). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3(1), 85–106.PubMed
37.
Pesudovs, K., Wright, T. A., & Gothwal, V. K. (2010). Visual disability assessment: valid measurement of activity limitation and mobility in cataract patients. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 94(6), 777–781.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Wright B. D. (1996) Reasonable mean-square fit values. In: B. D. Wright, J. M. Linacre (Eds.), Rasch measurement transactions (p. 370). Chicago: MESA.
39.
Linacre, J. M. (1998). Detecting multidimensionality: which residual data-type works best? Journal of Outcome Measurement, 2(3), 266–283.PubMed
40.
Smith, E. V., Jr. (2002). Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3(2), 205–231.PubMed
41.
Linacre J. M. (2005).User’s guide to Winsteps. Chicago: MESA Press.
42.
Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago: MESA Press.
43.
Mallinson, T., Stelmack, J., & Velozo, C. (2004). A comparison of the separation ratio and coefficient alpha in the creation of minimum item sets. Medical Care, 42(1 Suppl), I17–I24.PubMed
44.
Mallinson, T. (2007). Why measurement matters for measuring patient vision outcomes. Optometry and Vision Science, 84(8), 675–682.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Pesudovs, K., Burr, J. M., & Elliott, D. B. (2007). The development, assessment and selection of questionnaires. Optometry and Vision Science, 84, 664–675.
46.
Wright, B. D. (1996). Local dependency, correlations and principal components. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 10, 509–511.
47.
Wright B. D. (1985). Additivity in psychological measurement. In: E. Roskam (Ed.), Measurement and personality assessment (pp. 101–112). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
48.
Svensson, E. (2001). Guidelines to statistical evaluation of data from rating scales and questionnaires. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 33, 47–48.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Schipper H., Clinch J., Olweny C. L. M. (1996) Quality of life studies: Definitions and conceptual issues. In: B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials (pp. 11–23). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Press.
50.
Rubin, G. S., Munoz, B., Bandeen-Roche, K., & West, S. K. (2000). Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 41(11), 3327–3334.
51.
West, S. K., Munoz, B., Rubin, G. S., Schein, O. D., Bandeen-Roche, K., Zeger, S., et al. (1997). Function and visual impairment in a population-based study of older adults. The SEE project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 38(1), 72–82.
52.
Wang, J. J., Mitchell, P., Smith, W., Cumming, R. G., & Attebo, K. (1999). Impact of visual impairment on use of community support services by elderly persons: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 40(1), 12–19.
53.
Scott, I. U., Smiddy, W. E., Schiffman, J., Feuer, W. J., & Pappas, C. J. (1999). Quality of life of low-vision patients and the impact of low-vision services. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 128(1), 54–62.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Rovner, B. W., Zisselman, P. M., & Shmuely-Dulitzki, Y. (1996). Depression and disability in older people with impaired vision: a follow-up study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 44(2), 181–184.PubMed
55.
World Health Organization (1948) World Health Organization constitution. In: Basic documents. Geneva: World Health Organization.
56.
Sloane M. E., Ball K., Owsley C., Bruni J. R., Roenker D. L. (1992) The visual activities questionnaire: Developing an instrument for assessing problems in everyday visual tasks. In: Nonivasive assessment of the visual system: 1992 (pp. 26–29). Technical Digest (Optical Society of America).
57.
Andersen, E. B. (1977). Sufficient statistics and latent trait models. Psychometrika, 42, 69–81.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis
Auteurs
Vijaya K. Gothwal
Marmamula Srinivas
Gullapalli N. Rao
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2013
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0195-6

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2013

Association of anthropometric measures with SF-36v2 PCS and MCS in a multi-ethnic Asian population

  • Brief Communication

Relative importance measures for reprioritization response shift

Time trade-off and attitudes toward euthanasia: implications of using ‘death’ as an anchor in health state valuation

Impaired parent-reported health-related quality of life of underweight and obese children at elementary school entry

  • Open Access

The Hunter Syndrome-Functional Outcomes for Clinical Understanding Scale (HS-FOCUS) Questionnaire: evaluation of measurement properties

  • Original Paper

The association between post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms and the quality of life among Wenchuan earthquake survivors: the role of social support as a moderator