IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v32y2012i1p41-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-Cultural Evaluation of the WHOQOL-BREF Domains in Primary Care Depressed Patients Using Rasch Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Neusa Sica Rocha
  • Mick J. Power
  • Donald M. Bushnell
  • Marcelo P. Fleck

Abstract

Background . The Rasch model prescribes procedures to ensure that a scale constructed from multiple items conforms to fundamental requirements of interval scales of measurement. Objective . To test the Rasch properties of the domains of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument–abbreviated version (WHOQOL-BREF) in depressed patients from primary care settings. Design . Cross-sectional, cross-national study. Setting . Primary care. Patients . The sample consisted of 1193 patients having a confirmed diagnosis of depression from 6 countries (Australia, Brazil, Israel, Russia, Spain, and the United States) involved in the Longitudinal Investigation of Depression Outcomes (LIDO) study. Measurements . The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) diagnosed depression, whereas the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) assessed severity of depression. The WHOQOL-BREF measured generic quality of life (QOL). Results . Three of the 4 WHOQOL-BREF domains (physical, psychological, and environment) conform to the Rasch model expectations, following adjustments required mainly because of individual item misfit or differential item functioning (DIF) due to age or country. The social domain showed relatively poor psychometric properties, as observed in previous studies. Conclusions . The Rasch analysis demonstrated that, with some modifications, all domains of the WHOQOL-BREF, except for the social domain, provide an interval scale measure of generic subjective QOL in the context of depressed primary care patients in 6 countries worldwide.

Suggested Citation

  • Neusa Sica Rocha & Mick J. Power & Donald M. Bushnell & Marcelo P. Fleck, 2012. "Cross-Cultural Evaluation of the WHOQOL-BREF Domains in Primary Care Depressed Patients Using Rasch Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(1), pages 41-55, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:32:y:2012:i:1:p:41-55
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11415112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X11415112
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X11415112?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. Hunt, Sonja M. & McKenna, Stephen P., 1992. "The QLDS: A scale for the measurement of quality of life in depression," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 307-319, October.
    2. Ronald Hambleton & Liane Patsula, 1998. "Adapting Tests for Use in Multiple Languages and Cultures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 153-171, November.
    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. Crea, Thomas M., 2016. "Refugee higher education: Contextual challenges and implications for program design, delivery, and accompaniment," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 12-22.
    2. Wenjun Cao & Chongzheng Guo & Weiwei Ping & Zhijun Tan & Ying Guo & Jianzhong Zheng, 2016. "A Community-Based Study of Quality of Life and Depression among Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-10, July.

    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. David Effelsberg & Marc Solga & Jochen Gurt, 2014. "Transformational Leadership and Follower’s Unethical Behavior for the Benefit of the Company: A Two-Study Investigation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 81-93, March.
    2. Jan R. Oyebode & Simon Pini & Emma Ingleson & Molly Megson & Mike Horton & Linda Clare & Hareth Al-Janabi & Carol Brayne & Penny Wright, 2019. "Development of an Item Pool for a Needs-Based Measure of Quality of Life of Carers of a Family Member with Dementia," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(1), pages 125-136, February.
    3. Dirk De Clercq & Dave Bouckenooghe & Usman Raja & Ganna Matsyborska, 2014. "Unpacking the Goal Congruence–Organizational Deviance Relationship: The Roles of Work Engagement and Emotional Intelligence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(4), pages 695-711, November.
    4. J. Busschbach & B. Wolffenbuttel & L. Annemans & W. Meerding & M. Kołtowska-Häggström, 2011. "Deriving reference values and utilities for the QoL-AGHDA in adult GHD," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(3), pages 243-252, June.
    5. Marieke Krol & Jocé Papenburg & Marc Koopmanschap & Werner Brouwer, 2011. "Do Productivity Costs Matter?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(7), pages 601-619, July.
    6. Yu Zhang & Hongtao Xian & Yang Yang & Xiaoxue Zhang & Xinran Wang, 2019. "Relationship between psychosocial adaptation and health‐related quality of life of patients with stoma: A descriptive, cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(15-16), pages 2880-2888, August.
    7. Michał Seweryn Karbownik & Beata Jankowska-Polańska & Robert Horne & Karol Maksymilian Górski & Edward Kowalczyk & Janusz Szemraj, 2020. "Adaptation and validation of the Polish version of the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire among cardiovascular patients and medical students," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-26, April.

    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:sae:medema:v:32:y:2012:i:1:p:41-55. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.