Cited by 84Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMedical Practices and RehabilitationPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Examining functional content in widely used Health-Related Quality of Life scales.

Hall, Trevor, The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center Expert Panel on Health Measurement, Krahn, Gloria L., Horner-Johnson, Willi, Lamb, Gordon·2011·Rehabilitation Psychology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Assess extent to which generic Quality of Life (QOL) and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) scales include function in assessment of health, and identify health assessment items that are free of functional content. METHODS: An expert panel on measurement of health and disability reached consensus on definitions of health, disability, and function. They assessed all items of all generic (non-condition-specific) scales in the 2006 ProQolid database for being important to measuring health as distinct from function. Ratings were summarized as content validity ratios. Retained items were written into standard format and reviewed again by the expert panel and a validity panel with expertise in specific disabilities. RESULTS: Of 85 scales, 21 were retained as containing items important for assessing health. Scales ranged from 100% (BRFSS HRQOL, WHO-5) to only 4% of items rated as important. In further review of "important" items, functional content was identified in many of the items, particularly with regard to mental functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Popular generic scales of QOL and HRQOL vary greatly in the degree to which they include content on function. A pool of items can be identified that are relatively free of function. Distinguishing measurement of function and health is particularly important for people with long-standing functional limitations and for assessing the relationship of health with function.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0023054

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The WHO-5 is a widely administered PRO that can be used irrespective of underlying illness (or lack of illness), and has been thoroughly validated across many different mental health settings.

    “The WHO-5 is a widely administered PRO that can be used irrespective of underlying illness (or lack of illness), and has been thoroughly validated across many different mental health settings [84–87].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hall, T., The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center Expert Panel on Health Measurement, Krahn, G. L., Horner-Johnson, W., & Lamb, G.
Affiliations
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Sam Houston State University (US)
Venue
Rehabilitation Psychology
Published
2011-05
Volume
56
Issue
2
Pages
94-99
ISSN
  • 0090-5550 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1544
OpenAlex
W2022616026
Cited by
82
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
8.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Rehabilitation Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
US Department of Education (H133B040034)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
health-related quality of life, quality of life scale, functional content, content validity, disability assessment, psychological functioning
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Disability Evaluation, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sick Role, Reproducibility of Results, Consensus

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