Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries:: Results from the IQOLA Project

Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries:: Results from the IQOLA Project
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00106-1
复制
发表时间:
1998-11-01
影响因子:
7.2
通讯作者:
Sullivan, M
Sullivan, M
中科院分区:
医学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Gandek, B;Ware, JE;Sullivan, M

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

来自II个国家的一般人群样本(n = 1483至9151)的数据被用于评估数据质量,并检验SF-36健康调查中多项目量表的构建和评分基础假设。在所有国家,项目级数据缺失率一般较低,尽管以网格格式打印的项目略高。在每个国家,项目的含义通常被聚集在量表内的假设中:项目与假设量表之间的相关性大于0.40,只有一个例外,支持项目的内部一致性。题目与本量表的相关性显著高于与竞争量表的相关性,支持了题目的区别效度。可以为93-100%的被调查者构建量表。8份SF-36量表的内部一致性信度除2份外均在0.70以上。除了两个角色功能量表外,其他量表的地板效应都很低;角色功能量表的天花板效应都很高,在一些国家,身体功能、身体疼痛和社会功能量表也值得注意。这些结果支持了用总和评分法对这两个国家的SF-36翻译进行构建和评分。(C) 1998年Elsevier Science Inc。
Data from general population samples in II countries (n = 1483 to 9151) were used to assess data quality and test the assumptions underlying the construction and scoring of multi-item scales from the SF-36 Health Survey. Across all countries, the rate of item-level missing data generally was low, although slightly higher for items printed in the grid format. In each country, item means generally were clustered as hypothesized within scales: Correlations between items and hypothesized scales were greater than 0.40 with one exception, supporting item internal consistency. Items generally correlated significantly higher with their own scale than with competing scales, supporting item discriminant validity. Scales could be constructed for 93-100% of respondents. Internal consistency reliability of the eight SF-36 scales was above 0.70 for all scales, with two exceptions. Floor effects were low for all except the two role functioning scales; ceiling effects were high for both role functioning scales and also were noteworthy for the Physical Functioning, Bodily Pain, and Social Functioning scales in some countries. These results support the construction and scoring of the SF-36 translations in these II countries using the method of summated ratings. (C) 1998 by Elsevier Science Inc.