1999
DOI: 10.1093/ajhp/56.19.1965
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selecting among health-related quality-of-life instruments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
3
0
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…2007). Therefore, a number of diabetes‐specific measures of QoL have been developed and validated in order to assess patients' perceptions on diabetes emotional distress (Sen et al . 1999, Polonsky 2000, Garratt et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2007). Therefore, a number of diabetes‐specific measures of QoL have been developed and validated in order to assess patients' perceptions on diabetes emotional distress (Sen et al . 1999, Polonsky 2000, Garratt et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uma análise das publicações sobre qualidade de vida evidencia o crescimento do interesse na área. Enquanto em 1973, uma busca utilizando o termo qualidade de vida na MEDLINE citava somente cinco artigos, em 1998 este número passou a 16.256 citações 3 e, em 2001, chegou a 43.350 artigos com esse termo 4 .…”
Section: Introductionunclassified
“…The nature of the scales used in the instrument would depend on the intended use: whether the instrument is designed to be used for discriminative (or cross-sectional), evaluative (or longitudinal) or predictive purposes. A discriminative instrument would consist of mainly yes/no type of responses (Juniper, 1995 andSen et al, 1999). For evaluative instruments, individual items have to be sensitive to change.…”
Section: Hrql Measurement: Choice Of Scalesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An instrument that is used for discriminative purposes should have established reliability, cross-sectional validity (Guyatt et al, 1992), whereas an evaluative instrument should have reliability and longitudinal validity (Juniper, 1995 andSen et al, 1999). Reliability between patients would be measured by assessing the signal to noise ratio where signal represents between group differences, and noise represents within group differences (Streiner et al, 1989 andJuniper, 1995).…”
Section: Hrql Measurement: Psychometric Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%