Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria

The field of health status and quality of life (QoL) measurement – as a formal discipline with a cohesive theoretical framework, accepted methods, and diverse applications – has been evolving for the better part of 30 years. To identify health status and QoL instruments and review them against rigorous criteria as a precursor to creating an instrument library for later dissemination, the Medical Outcomes Trust in 1994 created an independently functioning Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). In the mid-1990s, the SAC defined a set of attributes and criteria to carry out instrument assessments; 5 years later, it updated and revised these materials to take account of the expanding theories and technologies upon which such instruments were being developed. This paper offers the SAC's current conceptualization of eight key attributes of health status and QoL instruments (i.e., conceptual and measurement model; reliability; validity; responsiveness; interpretability; respondent and administrative burden; alternate forms; and cultural and language adaptations) and the criteria by which instruments would be reviewed on each of those attributes. These are suggested guidelines for the field to consider and debate; as measurement techniques become both more familiar and more sophisticated, we expect that experts will wish to update and refine these criteria accordingly.

[1]  K N Lohr,et al.  Health Outcomes Methodology Symposium: Summary and Recommendations , 2000, Medical care.

[2]  G. Katona,et al.  The Art of Asking Questions , 1951 .

[3]  A. Bowling Measuring Health. A review of quality of life measurement scales , 1997 .

[4]  J. Ware,et al.  Differential item functioning in the Danish translation of the SF-36. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  Howard Wainer,et al.  Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer , 2000 .

[6]  T. Mills,et al.  Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires , 2006 .

[7]  T S Kristensen,et al.  The Danish SF-36 Health Survey: translation and preliminary validity studies. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  C. McHorney,et al.  Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? , 1995, Quality of Life Research.

[9]  M. R. Novick,et al.  Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. , 1971 .

[10]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Fundamentals of Item Response Theory , 1991 .

[11]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[12]  Keith F Widaman,et al.  Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  Edward G. Carmines,et al.  Reliability and Validity Assessment , 1979 .

[14]  Robert F. DeVellis,et al.  Scale Development: Theory and Applications. , 1992 .

[15]  L. Cronbach Essentials of psychological testing , 1960 .

[16]  Allen Hutchinson,et al.  MEASURES OF NEED AND OUTCOME FOR PRIMARY HEALTH CARE , 1992 .

[17]  L. Aday,et al.  Designing and conducting health surveys : a comprehensive guide , 2006 .

[18]  J. Mcewen,et al.  Measuring Health—A Review of Quality of Life Measurement Scales , 1992 .

[19]  R. P. McDonald,et al.  Test Theory: A Unified Treatment , 1999 .

[20]  L. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[21]  Ron D. Hays,et al.  Quality of life assessment in clinical trials : methods and practice , 1998 .