Agreement between the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) interview and a paper-administered adaption

Background The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) is a prevalent face-to-face interview method for measuring quality of life by integrating respondent-generated dimensions. To apply this method in clinical trials, a paper-administered alternative w...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:BMC medical research methodology Ročník 20; číslo 1; s. 80 - 11
Hlavní autori: Burckhardt, Marion, Fleischer, Steffen, Berg, Almuth
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: London BioMed Central 10.04.2020
BioMed Central Ltd
Springer Nature B.V
BMC
Predmet:
Analysis
Cardiac surgery
Clinical trials
Data collection
German language
Health aspects
Health Sciences
Health surveys
Heart surgery
Intensive care
Medical research
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Methods
Nurses
Patient outcomes
Patient reported outcome measures
Psychometrics
quality
Quality of life
Quantitative psychology
Questionnaires
reporting
Research Article
Research methodology
Statistical Theory and Methods
Statistics for Life Sciences
Surveys
Theory of Medicine/Bioethics
Treatment outcome
Germany
Patient reported outcome measures
Clinical trials
Psychometrics
Cardiac surgery
Quality of life
ISSN:1471-2288, 1471-2288
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) is a prevalent face-to-face interview method for measuring quality of life by integrating respondent-generated dimensions. To apply this method in clinical trials, a paper-administered alternative would be of interest. Therefore, our study aimed to analyze the agreement between the SEIQoL-DW and a paper questionnaire version (SEIQoL-PF/G). Methods In a crossover design, both measures were completed in a random sequence. 104 patients at a heart surgery hospital in Germany were randomly assigned to receive either the SEIQoL-DW or the SEIQoL-PF/G as the first measurement in the sequence. Patients were approached on their earliest stable day after surgery. The average time between both measurements was 1 day (mean 1.3; SD 0.8). Agreement regarding the indices, ratings, and weightings of nominated life areas (cues) was explored using Bland-Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement (LoA). Agreement of the SEIQoL indices was defined as acceptable if the LoA did not exceed a threshold of 10 scale points. Data from n  = 99 patients were included in the agreement analysis. Results Both measures led to similarly nominated cues. The most frequently nominated cues were “physical health” and “family”. In the Bland-Altman plot, the indices showed a mean of differences of 2 points (95% CI, − 1 to 6). The upper LoA showed a difference of 36 points (95% CI, 30 to 42), and the lower LoA showed a difference of − 31 points (95% CI, − 37 to − 26). Thus, the LoAs and confidence intervals exceeded the predefined threshold. The Bland-Altman plots for the cue levels and cue weights showed similar results. The SEIQoL-PF/G version showed a tendency for equal weighting of cues, while the weighting procedure of the SEIQoL-DW led to greater variability. Conclusions For cardiac surgery patients, use of the current version of the SEIQoL-PF/G as a substitute for the SEIQoL-DW is not recommended. The current questionnaire weighting method seems to be unable to distinguish weighting for different cues. Therefore, the further design of a weighting method without interviewer support as a paper-administered measure of individual quality of life is desirable.
Bibliografia:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:1471-2288
1471-2288
DOI:10.1186/s12874-020-00961-9