Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of the SF-36 in Chilean older adults: the ALEXANDROS study.

ABSTRACT: To validate short-form-36 health survey (SF-36) with specific scoring algorithm obtained in a large sample of Chilean older people and to associate quality of life in this sample with social and health related factors. A cross-sectional study on 2,143 community-living subjects aged 60-92 years (33 % men and 67 % women) conducted in Santiago, Chile. Scores in 8 scales of SF-36-physical function (PF), role physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role emotional (RE) and mental health (MH)-, were calculated. Factor analysis was used to extract two principal factors and logistic regression model was applied to estimate its association with socio-demographic and health variables. The internal consistency of scales was high (Cronbach's alpha 0.86-0.87). Factor analysis retained two factors: mental (MCS) and physical (PCS) components accounting for 65.3 % of total variance (55.3 and 10.0 % respectively). High correlations (0.61-0.94) between MCS and MH, V, RE and SF were obtained. PCS correlated highest (0.72-0.86) with RP, PF and BP. Self-perceived symptoms of depression (GDS-15 ≥5) was the main variable explaining low scores in both MCS and PCS (adjusted OR = 26.9; 95 % CI: 15.3-47.2; OR = 3.4; 95 % CI: 2.1-5.5, respectively). We have demonstrated the reliability and validity of SF-36 questionnaire to evaluate health related quality of life, reporting Chilean-Specific factor score coefficients for MCS and PCS based in national Chilean means and standard deviations for older people. After adjusting by age and gender, the main predictors of low health related QoL in Chilean older people were self-perceived symptoms of depression, the presence of two or more chronic diseases and illiteracy. Important gender inequalities were observed in all of these results, being consistently less favorable in women than in men.

SUBMITTER: Lera L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5549118 | biostudies-other | 2013 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrevious questionnaires targeting older adults' sedentary time have underestimated total sedentary time, possibly by not including all relevant specific sedentary behaviors. The current study aimed to investigate the criterion validity and test-retest reliability of a new questionnaire assessing a comprehensive set of sedentary behaviors. Additionally, we examined whether the criterion validity of the questionnaire differed according to age, gender and educational level.MethodsA sample of home-dwelling Belgian older adults (>64 years, n?=?508) completed a newly-developed questionnaire assessing twelve specific sedentary behaviors and wore an accelerometer for seven consecutive days as criterion measure. A subsample (n?=?28) completed the questionnaire a second time to examine test-retest reliability. Data collection occurred between September 2010 and October 2012.ResultsCorrelational analyses examining self-reported total sitting time and accelerometer-derived sedentary time yielded a Spearman's ? of 0.30. Using the Bland-Altman regression procedure, self-reported total sitting time underestimated accelerometer-derived sedentary time by -82 minutes/day for a participant with an average level of sedentary time (539 minutes/day). Corresponding 95% limits of agreement were wide (-364, 200 minutes/day). Better, but still not ideal, validity findings were observed in the younger, male and tertiary-educated subgroups. Acceptable test-retest reliability (ICC?>?0.70) was found for total sitting time, TV viewing, computer use, and driving a car.ConclusionValidity for older adults' self-reported total sitting time against accelerometer-derived sedentary time was not strong, but comparable to previous studies. However, underestimation of total sedentary time was lower compared to previous studies, possibly explained by the inclusion of additional specific sedentary behaviors. Further research is needed to develop self-report tools and objective criterion measures that accurately measure engagement in (specific) sedentary behavior(s) among different subgroups of the older population.

Project description:BackgroundThe EQ-5D-5 L and the SF-12 are the most commonly used generic measures of health-related quality of life among people with arthritis. However, there is little evidence on the extent to which the individual dimensions and domains of these instruments perform among this population. The objective was to examine the discriminative validity of the EQ-5D-5 L and the SF-12 version 2 (and SF-6D) in capturing the burden of arthritis on health-related quality of life in older adults.MethodsCross-sectional data from the Alberta Retired Teachers Association survey were used. A known-groups approach, with a-priori hypotheses, was used to examine the discriminative validity of the domain and summary scores of the EQ-5D-5 L and the SF-12 version 2 (and SF-6D). Groups were defined based on self-reported of arthritis, chronic pain level, presence and number of comorbidities, and self-reported health status.ResultsMean age of respondents (N = 2844) was 68.6 (standard deviation [SD] 5.9) years; 54.8% were female, with mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.2 kg/m2 (SD 4.8), and 36.6% reported having arthritis. The overall mean EQ-5D-5 L index score was 0.86 (SD 0.11) and that of SF-6D was 0.79 (SD 0.13). Participants with arthritis had lower EQ-5D-5 L index score (0.83, SD 0.13) and SF-6D index score (0.75, SD 0.13) compared to those without arthritis (0.88, SD 0.09 and 0.81, SD 0.12, respectively). EQ-5D-5 L and SF-6D index scores demonstrated moderate discriminative validity with a moderate effect size (0.5). Related dimensions and domains between the EQ-5D-5 L and SF-12 (e.g., mobility with physical functioning score, pain/discomfort with bodily pain and anxiety/depression with mental health) were moderately to strongly correlated (r = 0.6-0.7). Both instruments could not adequately discriminate between participants with moderate and severe chronic pain of 6-month duration.ConclusionOverall, the EQ-5D-5 L pain/discomfort and mobility dimensions, and the SF-12 bodily pain scale had moderate discriminative ability among older adults with arthritis. However, both instruments had limited discriminative ability for chronic pain. The importance and nature of chronic pain assessment in a given application need to be considered when choosing any of these instruments for measuring health-related quality of life in this patient population.

Project description:BackgroundWith the growing number of young-older adults (baby-boomers), there is an increasing demand for assessment tools specific for this population, which are able to detect subtle balance and mobility deficits. Various balance and mobility tests already exist, but suffer from ceiling effects in higher functioning older adults. A reliable and valid challenging balance and mobility test is critical to determine a young-older adult's balance and mobility performance and to timely initiate preventive interventions. The aim was to evaluate the concurrent validity, inter- and intrarater reliability, internal consistency, and ceiling effects of a challenging balance and mobility scale, the Community Balance and Mobility Scale (CBM), in young-older adults aged 60 to 70 years.MethodsFifty-one participants aged 66.4 ± 2.7 years (range, 60-70 years) were assessed with the CBM. The Fullerton Advanced Balance scale (FAB), 3-Meter Tandem Walk (3MTW), 8-level balance scale, Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG), and 7-m habitual gait speed were used to estimate concurrent validity, examined by Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ). Inter- and intrarater reliability were calculated as Intra-class-correlations (ICC), and internal consistency by Cronbach alpha and item-total correlations (ρ). Ceiling effects were determined by obtaining the percentage of participants reaching the highest possible score.ResultsThe CBM significantly correlated with the FAB (ρ = 0.75; p < .001), 3MTW errors (ρ = - 0.61; p < .001), 3MTW time (ρ = - 0.35; p = .05), the 8-level balance scale (ρ = 0.35; p < .05), the TUG (ρ = - 0.42; p < .01), and 7-m habitual gait speed (ρ = 0.46, p < .001). Inter- (ICC2,k = 0.97), intrarater reliability (ICC3,k = 1.00) were excellent, and internal consistency (α = 0.88; ρ = 0.28-0.81) was good to satisfactory. The CBM did not show ceiling effects in contrast to other scales.ConclusionsConcurrent validity of the CBM was good when compared to the FAB and moderate to good when compared to other measures of balance and mobility. Based on this study, the CBM can be recommended to measure balance and mobility performance in the specific population of young-older adults.Trial registrationTrial number: ISRCTN37750605 . (Registered on 21/04/2016).

Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of the SF-36 in Chilean older adults: the ALEXANDROS study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets