Intervals between response choices on a single-item measure of quality of life.

Détails

Ressource 1Télécharger: BIB_286BA540FC64.P001.pdf (535.57 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: Non spécifiée
ID Serval
serval:BIB_286BA540FC64
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Intervals between response choices on a single-item measure of quality of life.
Périodique
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Auteur(s)
Henchoz Y., Meylan L., Santos-Eggimann B.
Collaborateur(s)
Research Group on the quality of life of older people in cantons of Vaud and Geneva
ISSN
1477-7525 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1477-7525
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
14
Numéro
1
Pages
41
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Comparative Study ; Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: epublish
Résumé
BACKGROUND: A single overall rating of quality of life (QoL) is a sensitive method that is often used in population surveys. However, the exact meaning of response choices is unclear. In particular, uneven spacing may affect the way QoL ratings should be analyzed and interpreted. This study aimed to determine the intervals between response choices to a single-item QoL assessment.
METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted on data from the Lc65+ cohort study and two additional, population-based, stratified random samples of older people (N = 5,300). Overall QoL was rated as excellent, very good, good, fair or poor. A QoL score (range 0-100) was derived from participants' answers to a 28-item QoL assessment tool. A transformed QoL score ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) was calculated. The same procedure was repeated to compute seven domain-specific QoL subscores (Feeling of safety; Health and mobility; Autonomy; Close entourage; Material resources; Esteem and recognition; Social and cultural life).
RESULTS: Mean (95 % confidence intervals) QoL scores were 96.23 (95.81-96.65) for excellent, 93.09 (92.74-93.45) for very good, 81.45 (80.63-82.27) for good, 65.44 (62.67-68.20) for fair and 54.52 (45.31-63.73) for poor overall QoL, corresponding to transformed QoL scores of respectively 5.00, 4.70, 3.58, 2.05, and 1.00. Ordinality of the categories excellent to poor was preserved in all seven QoL subscores.
CONCLUSIONS: The excellent-to-poor rating scale provides an ordinal measure of overall QoL. The intervals between response choices are unequal, but an interval scale can be obtained after adequate recoding of excellent, very good, good, fair and poor.
Mots-clé
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cohort Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Quality of Life/psychology, Socioeconomic Factors, Time Factors
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
17/03/2016 18:05
Dernière modification de la notice
20/11/2019 6:20
Données d'usage