Quality of Life Research

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 179–184 | Cite as

Validation of the Dutch Version of the CDC Core Healthy Days Measures in a Community Sample

Brief communiaction

Abstract

An important disadvantage of most indicators of health related quality of life used in public health surveillance is their length. In this study the authors investigated the reliability and validity of a short indicator of health related quality of life, the Dutch version of the four item ‘CDC Core Healthy Days Measures’ (CDC HRQOL-4). The reliability was evaluated by calculating Cronbach’s alpha of the CDC HRQOL-4. The concurrent validity was tested by comparing the CDC HRQOL-4 with three other indicators of health related quality of life, the SF-36, the WHOQoL-BREF and the GHQ-12. The construct validity was evaluated by assessing the ability of the CDC HRQOL-4 to discriminate between respondents with and without a (non-mental) chronic condition, depression, a visit to the general practitioner and use of prescription drugs. Randomly sampled respondents from the city of Utrecht were asked to fill in a questionnaire. 659 respondents (response rate 45%) completed the questionnaire. Participants represented the adult, non-institutionalised population of the city of Utrecht, the Netherlands: 58% women; mean age 41 years; 15% of non-Dutch origin. The reliability of the CDC HRQOL-4 was good. Cronbach’s alpha of three of the four CDC HRQOL-4-items was 0.77 which is good for internal consistent scales. The concurrent validity was good. The four items of the CDC HRQOL-4 showed higher correlations with their corresponding domains of the other instrument than the other domains. Comparison of respondents with or without a chronic condition, depression, visit to the GP and use of prescription drugs produced evidence for an excellent construct validity of the CDC HRQOL-4.

Keywords

Health related quality of life Reliability Validity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hennessy, CH, Moriarty, DG, Zack, MM, Scherr, PA, Brackbill, R 1994Measuring health-related quality of life for public health surveillancePublic Health Reports109665672PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Idler, EL, Benyamani, Y 1997Self-rated health and mortality: A review of 27 community studiesJ Health Soc Behav382137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Idler, EL, Angel, RJ 1990Self-rated health and mortality in the NHANES-I epidemiologic follow-up studyAm J Public Health80446452PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Siegel PZ. Self-reported health status: public health surveillance and small-area analysis. In: Schecter S, (ed.), Proceedings of the 1993 NCHS Conference on cognitive aspects of self-reported health status. Hyattsville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Centre for Health Statistics, 1994Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garretsen, HFL, Gilst, ECH, Oers, JAM 1991Collecting health information at a local levelHealth Promotion Int6121133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ware, JE, Sherbourne, C 1992The MOS 36-item short-form health survey I: Conceptual framework and item selectionMed Care30473483PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McHorney, CA, Ware, JE, Raszek, AE 1993The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) II: Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructsMed Care31247263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    CDC2000Measuring Healthy Days. Population Assessment of Health-Related Quality of LifeCentres for Disease Control and PreventionAtlantaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jenkinson, C, Layte, R 1997Development and testing of the UK SF-12J Health Serv Res Policy21418PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Qmetric2001How to Score and Interpret Single-Item Health Status Measures: A Manual for User of the SF-8 ™ Health SurveyLincolnQmetricGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bowling, A, Windsor, J 1997Discriminative power of the HSQ-12 in relation to age, sex and longstanding illness: Findings from a survey of households in Great BritainJ Epidemiol Commun Health51564573Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    EoroQoL Group1990EoroQoL – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of lifeHealth Policy16199208Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    CDC1995Health-related quality of life measures – United States, 1993MMWR4495200Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    CDC1994Quality of life as a new public health measure – Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1993MMWR43375380Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zee, K, Sanderman, R, Heyink, J 1993De psychome- trische kwaliteiten van de MOS 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) in een Nederlandse populatieT Soc Gezondheidsz71183191Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dijk, A Ph, Oers, JAM, Sturmans, F 2000Test-hertest betrouwbaarheid van de SF-36 in een algemene populatie en in sociaal-economische subgroepenT Soc Gezondheidsz78373381Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    The WHOQoL Group1995The World Health Organisation Quality of Life assessment (WHOQoL): Position paper from the World Health OrganisationSoc Sci Med4114031409Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    The WHOQoL Group1998Development of the World Health Organisation WHOQoL-BREF Quality of Life assessmentPsychol Med25551558Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vries J de, Heck GL van. De Nederlandse WHOQoL-100 Tilburg: Tilburg University Press, 1995Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldberg, DP 1972The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaireOxford University PressLondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goldberg, DP 1988A Uses Guide to the General Health QuestionnaireNfer NelsonWindsorGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koeter, MJW, Ormel, J 1991General Health Questionnaire. Nederlandse bewerkingSwets & ZeitlingerLisseGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moum TA. Health-related quality of life in Norway – A nationwide mixed-mode panelstudy of the CDC Healthy Days measures. CDC Quality of life seminar, Atlanta, 1999Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alfredsson J. Har levnadsvanorna förändrats? Resultat från levnadsvaneenkäter 1989, 1994 samt 1999. Gävleborg, Samhällsmedicin, 2000Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guillemin, F, Bombardier, C, Beaton, D 1993Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelinesJ Clin Epidemiol4614171432CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bland, JM, Altman, DG 1997Cronbach’s alfa (Statistics notes)Brit Med J314572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Andresen, EM, Fouts, BS, Romels, JC, Brownson, CA 1999Per formance of health-related quality of life instruments in a spinal cord injured populationArch Phys Med Rehabil80877884CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Newshaffer, CJ 1998Validation of Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) HRQoL measures in a statewide sampleCDCAtlantaGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Diwan, S, Moriarty, DG 1995A conceptual framework for identifying unmet health care needs of community dwelling elderlyJ Appl Geront144363Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nanda, U, Andresen, EM 1998Performance of measures of health-related quality of life and function among disabled adultsQual Life Res7644Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Andresen, EM 1999Population Measurement of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)Qual Life Newslett217Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moriarty, DG, Zack, M 1999Validation of the CDC’s Healthy Days-measuresQual Life Res8617Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Andresen, EM, Catlin, TK, Wyrwich, KW, Jackson Thompson, J 2003Retest reliability of surveillance questions on health related quality of lifeJ Epdemiol Commun Health57339343Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EpidemiologyMunicipal Health Service UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Public HealthErasmus MC - University Medical Centre RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations