Cited by 162Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth and Well-being StudiesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The Spanish Version of the Quality of Life Index: Presentation and Validation

MEZZICH, JUAN E., RUIPÉREZ, MARÍA A., PÉREZ, CARLOS, YOON, GIHYUN, LIU, JASON, MAHMUD, SYED·2000·The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease

Abstract

Latino or Spanish-speaking individuals constitute a substantial and growing population in the United States, in addition to their general presence, with cultural variations, throughout Latin America and the Iberian Peninsula. To respond to the needs of this population, a Spanish version of the Quality of Life Index (QLI-Sp) was developed. The QLI, in its various language versions, is a concise instrument for comprehensive, culture-informed, and self-rated assessment of health-rated quality of life. It is composed of 10 dimensions collated from the international literature, including aspects ranging from physical well-being to spiritual fulfillment, as well as a global perception of quality of life. Each item is to be rated on a 10-point line by Latino subjects according to their culture-informed understanding of that concept. The study samples included 60 Latino psychiatric patients (20 outpatient, 20 inpatient, and 20 partial hospitalization) and 20 Latino actively working hospital professionals. Mean time of completion was 2.4 minutes among health professionals and 3.6 minutes among patients. The vast majority of respondents (72% of patients and 1000% of professionals) judged the instrument as easy to use. The test-retest reliability correlation coefficient of the QLI-Sp mean score was .89. The discriminant validity of the QLI-Sp was documented by the highly significant difference obtained between the mean scores of the two samples selected to represent quite different levels of quality of life.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005053-200005000-00008

Cites

11 of 11 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MEZZICH, J. E., RUIPÉREZ, M. A., PÉREZ, C., YOON, G., LIU, J., & MAHMUD, S.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
Published
2000-05
Volume
188
Issue
5
Pages
301-305
ISSN
0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1990039850
Cited by
162
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
12.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Health and Well-being Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
quality of life index, Spanish translation, Latino population, quality of life assessment, self-rated health, psychiatric patients, mental health professionals, test-retest reliability, discriminant validity, instrument development, cultural adaptation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Care, Mental Disorders, Female, Health Status, Hispanic or Latino, Hospitalization, Humans, Language, Male, Middle Aged, New York City, Personality Inventory, Personnel, Hospital, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Social Adjustment, 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