Cited by 1,125Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifePsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

The short form health survey (SF-36): translation and validation study of the Iranian version

Open access
Montazeri, Ali, Goshtasebi, Azita, Vahdaninia, Mariam, Gandek, Barbara·2005·Quality of Life Research

Abstract

This was a large population-based study to develop and validate the Iranian version of the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) for use in health related quality of life assessment in Iran. A culturally comparable questionnaire was developed and pilot tested. Then, the Iranian version of the SF-36 was administered to a random sample of 4163 healthy individuals aged 15 years and over in Tehran. The mean age of the respondents was 35.1 (SD = 16.0) years, 52% were female, mostly married (58%) and the mean years of their formal education was 10.0 (SD = 4.5). Reliability was estimated using the internal consistency and validity was assessed using known groups comparison and convergent validity. In addition factor analysis was performed. The internal consistency (to test reliability) showed that all eight SF-36 scales met the minimum reliability standard, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.77 to 0.90 with the exception of the vitality scale (alpha = 0.65). Known groups comparison showed that in all scales the SF-36 discriminated between men and women, and old and the young respondents as anticipated (all p values less than 0.05). Convergent validity (to test scaling assumptions) using each item correlation with its hypothesized scale showed satisfactory results (all correlation above 0.40 ranging from 0.58 to 0.95). Factor analysis identified two principal components that jointly accounted for 65.9% of the variance. In general, the Iranian version of the SF-36 performed w…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11136-004-1014-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Montazeri, A., Goshtasebi, A., Vahdaninia, M., & Gandek, B.
Affiliations
Iranian Institute for Health Sciences Research (IR)
Corresponding author
Montazeri, Ali
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Published
2005-04
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
875-882
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
OpenAlex
W2052114512
Cited by
1,125
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 71 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 77 · 2015: 77 · 2014: 100 · 2013: 59 · 2012: 65
FWCI
31.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
SF-36, Short Form Health Survey, health-related quality of life, cross-cultural adaptation, questionnaire validation, reliability statistics, convergent validity, known-groups comparison, factor structure, general population, Tehran
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Educational Status, Employment, Female, Health Status, Health Surveys, Humans, Iran, Male, Middle Aged, Population Surveillance, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review