IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v48y1999i4p473-487.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selecting national items for the WHOQOL: conceptual and psychometric considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Skevington, S. M.
  • Bradshaw, J.
  • Saxena, S.

Abstract

The WHOQOL is a new measure designed to assess quality of life cross-culturally in health and health care. An international core of 276 items covering 29 facets of quality of life organised into 6 domains has been established conceptually and then assessed in psychometric terms. The method also allowed for the inclusion of extra national items to enable the concept of quality of life to be complete for each language and culture and to achieve conceptual equivalence between different language versions in participating centres. The present study investigates the properties of these national items using data obtained from 3740 participants world-wide, who completed the instrument in 10 of 16 original WHOQOL centres. Five statistical criteria were applied to 144 national items to examine their performance in competition with internationally agreed core items from the same facet, using data obtained from within that centre. Multi-dimensional scaling and cluster analysis was used to examine the structural relationship of national items within their own facet and directed their inclusion. Forty (29%) national items were selected and detailed examples demonstrate the selection methods used. They show how entirely new facets as well as individual items can be assessed for appending to the core WHOQOL-100. They also enable ambiguity to be resolved where there may be doubt about whether proposed items constitute part of an existing facet or justify a new one. Where national items are similar in more than one centre, a mechanism is provided whereby these items can be re-evaluated as candidates for inclusion in any future revision of the international core. Lastly, a case is identified that may provide justification for the establishment of national facets.

Suggested Citation

  • Skevington, S. M. & Bradshaw, J. & Saxena, S., 1999. "Selecting national items for the WHOQOL: conceptual and psychometric considerations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 473-487, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:48:y:1999:i:4:p:473-487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(98)00355-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christian U Krägeloh & D Rex Billington & Patricia Hsien-Chuan Hsu & Xuan Joanna Feng & Oleg N Medvedev & Paula Kersten & Jason Landon & Richard J Siegert, 2016. "Ordinal-To-Interval Scale Conversion Tables and National Items for the New Zealand Version of the WHOQOL-BREF," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Giacaman, Rita & Mataria, Awad & Nguyen-Gillham, Viet & Safieh, Rula Abu & Stefanini, Angelo & Chatterji, Somnath, 2007. "Quality of life in the Palestinian context: An inquiry in war-like conditions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 68-84, April.
    3. Ting Lin, 2007. "Identifying Optimal Items in Quality of Life Assessment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 661-672, October.
    4. Ting Lin & Grace Yao, 2009. "Evaluating Item Discrimination Power of WHOQOL-BREF from an Item Response Model Perspectives," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 141-153, April.
    5. James Copestake, 2008. "Wellbeing in international development: what's new?," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(5), pages 577-597.
    6. Grace Yao & Chia-huei Wu, 2009. "Similarities and Differences Among the Taiwan, China, and Hong-Kong Versions of the WHOQOL Questionnaire," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 79-98, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:48:y:1999:i:4:p:473-487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.