IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0109221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement Properties of the Chinese Version of the Youth Quality of Life Instrument–Weight Module (YQOL-W)

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao-Ying Jiang
  • Hong-Mei Wang
  • Todd C Edwards
  • Ying-Ping Chen
  • Yi-Ran Lv
  • Donald L Patrick

Abstract

Background: Childhood obesity is a growing public health concern in China. It not only compromises physical health, but also has negative impacts on psychosocial well-being. As obesity rates increase, finding out what the perceptions of Chinese youth are regarding their weight is important for intervention planning and evaluation. However, there is a paucity of available obesity-specific instruments for children and adolescents in China and youth weight-specific quality of life (QOL) has been little reported. This study aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of the Chinese version of the Youth Quality of Life Instrument – Weight Module (YQOL-W). Methods: The Chinese version of the YQOL-W was administered to 840 youth aged 11–18 from nine schools. Measurement properties including measurement model, reliability, validity and burden were evaluated. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis showed that a three-factor model had acceptable model fit. The instrument had robust internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.84 to 0.96 and acceptable test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) all higher than 0.7. The standard error of measurement (SEM) values for the Self, Social and Environment factors and total score were 10.352, 9.526, 12.086 and 8.425, respectively. The small real differences (SRDs) for the Self, Social and Environment factors and total score were 28.675, 26.387, 33.478, and 23.337, respectively. The Pearson's correlation coefficients between the YQOL-W and the PedsQL4.0 General Core Scales were stronger between comparable dimensions than those between less comparable dimensions, demonstrating convergent and discriminant evidence of construct validity. Significant differences were found in subscale and total scores across weight status, age and genders (P

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao-Ying Jiang & Hong-Mei Wang & Todd C Edwards & Ying-Ping Chen & Yi-Ran Lv & Donald L Patrick, 2014. "Measurement Properties of the Chinese Version of the Youth Quality of Life Instrument–Weight Module (YQOL-W)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-10, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0109221
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0109221
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0109221&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0109221?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Brazier & Mark Deverill, 1999. "A checklist for judging preference‐based measures of health related quality of life: Learning from psychometrics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 41-51, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ying-Ping Chen & Hong-Mei Wang & Todd C Edwards & Ting Wang & Xiao-Ying Jiang & Yi-Ran Lv & Donald L Patrick, 2015. "Factors Influencing Quality of Life of Obese Students in Hangzhou, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-11, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michaël Schwarzinger & Jean‐Louis Lanoë & Erik Nord & Isabelle Durand‐Zaleski, 2004. "Lack of multiplicative transitivity in person trade‐off responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 171-181, February.
    2. David G. T. Whitehurst & Stirling Bryan & Martyn Lewis, 2011. "Systematic Review and Empirical Comparison of Contemporaneous EQ-5D and SF-6D Group Mean Scores," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(6), pages 34-44, November.
    3. Aureliano Paolo Finch & John Brazier & Clara Mukuria, 2021. "Selecting Bolt-on Dimensions for the EQ-5D: Testing the Impact of Hearing, Sleep, Cognition, Energy, and Relationships on Preferences Using Pairwise Choices," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(1), pages 89-99, January.
    4. Tsuchiya, Aki & Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer, 2006. "Comparison of valuation methods used to generate the EQ-5D and the SF-6D value sets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 334-346, March.
    5. San Miguel, Fernando & Ryan, Mandy & Scott, Anthony, 2002. "Are preferences stable? The case of health care," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Marra, Carlo A. & Woolcott, John C. & Kopec, Jacek A. & Shojania, Kamran & Offer, Robert & Brazier, John E. & Esdaile, John M. & Anis, Aslam H., 2005. "A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 1571-1582, April.
    7. Norah L. Crossnohere & Ryan Fischer & Andrew Lloyd & Lisa A. Prosser & John F. P. Bridges, 2021. "Assessing the Appropriateness of the EQ-5D for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Patient-Centered Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(2), pages 209-221, February.
    8. Mandy Ryan & Mabelle Amaya‐Amaya, 2005. "‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(6), pages 609-619, June.
    9. Adedokun Oluwafemi Ojelabi & Afolabi Elijah Bamgboye & Jonathan Ling, 2019. "Preference-based measure of health-related quality of life and its determinants in sickle cell disease in Nigeria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Hareth Al‐Janabi & Terry N. Flynn & Tim J. Peters & Stirling Bryan & Joanna Coast, 2015. "Test–Retest Reliability of Capability Measurement in the UK General Population," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(5), pages 625-630, May.
    11. Karen Gerard & Katharine Johnston & Jackie Brown, 1999. "The role of a pre‐scored multi‐attribute health classification measure in validating condition‐specific health state descriptions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(8), pages 685-699, December.
    12. D. Stratmann‐Schoene & T. Kuehn & R. Kreienberg & R. Leidl, 2006. "A preference‐based index for the SF‐12," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 553-564, June.
    13. Stavros Petrou & Christine Hockley, 2005. "An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1169-1189, November.
    14. Jack Dowie, 2002. "Decision validity should determine whether a generic or condition‐specific HRQOL measure is used in health care decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, January.
    15. Joseph Kwon & Sarah Smith & Rakhee Raghunandan & Martin Howell & Elisabeth Huynh & Sungwook Kim & Thomas Bentley & Nia Roberts & Emily Lancsar & Kirsten Howard & Germaine Wong & Jonathan Craig & Stavr, 2023. "Systematic Review of the Psychometric Performance of Generic Childhood Multi-attribute Utility Instruments," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 559-584, July.
    16. Stavros Petrou & Joseph Kwon & Jason Madan, 2018. "A Practical Guide to Conducting a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Health State Utility Values," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(9), pages 1043-1061, September.
    17. Simon J Palfreyman & Angela M Tod & John E Brazier & Jonathan A Michaels, 2010. "A systematic review of health‐related quality of life instruments used for people with venous ulcers: an assessment of their suitability and psychometric properties," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(19‐20), pages 2673-2703, October.
    18. Bromley, Hannah L. & Petrie, Dennis & Mann, G.Bruce & Nickson, Carolyn & Rea, Daniel & Roberts, Tracy E., 2019. "Valuing the health states associated with breast cancer screening programmes: A systematic review of economic measures," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 142-154.
    19. Catherine Le Galès & Catherine Buron & Nathalie Costet & Sophia Rosman & Gérard Slama, 2001. "Développement d'un index d'états de santé pondéré par les utilités en population française : le Health Utilities Index," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 150(4), pages 71-87.
    20. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0109221. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.