Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B

, Volume 8, Issue 8, pp 604–608 | Cite as

Crossover randomized controlled trial of the electronic version of the Chinese SF-36

  • Chen Tian-hui 
  • Li Lu 
  • Sigle Joerg M. 
  • Du Ya-ping 
  • Wang Hong-mei 
  • Lei Jun 
Science Letters

Abstract

Objectives

to verify the feasibility and reliability of the electronic version of Chinese SF-36 based on the Quality-of-Life-Recorder.

Design

A crossover randomized controlled trial, comparing a paper-based and an electronic version of the Chinese SF-36, was conducted. According to generated random numbers, interviewees were asked to fill out either the electronic version or the paper version first. The second version was filled in after a pause of at least 10 min.

Settings and participants

One group of 100 medical students at the School of Medicine of Zhejiang University and the other group of 50 outpatients at a clinic for general practice in Hangzhou City (China) were eventually recruited in this study.

Results

The acceptance of the electronic version was good (60% of medical students and 84% of outpatients preferred the electronic version). At the level of eight-scale scores, the mean-difference for each scale (except for general health) between the two versions was less than 5%. At the level of 36 questions, the percentage of “exact agreement” ranged within 64%–99%; the percentage of “global agreement” ranged within 72%–99%; 77% of the kappa coefficients demonstrated “good/excellent agreement” and 23% of the kappa coefficients demonstrated “medium agreement”.

Conclusion

This study, for the first time, can provide empirical basis for the confirmation of the feasibility and reliability of the electronic version of the Chinese SF-36 and may provide an impulse towards widespread deployment of the Quality-of-Life-Recorder in Chinese populations.

Key words

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) SF-36 Electronic questionnaire Computer based testing General practice Randomized control trial Feasibility Reliability 

CLC number

R395 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Caro Sr, J.J., Caro, I, Caro, J., Wouters, F., Juniper, E.F., 2001. Does electronic implementation of questionnaires used in asthma alter responses compared to paper implementation? Qual. Life Res., 10(8):683–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Drummond, H.E., Ghosh, S., Ferguson, A., Brackenridge, D., Tiplady, B., 1995. Electronic quality of life questionnaires: a comparison of pen-based electronic questionnaires with conventional paper in a gastrointestinal study. Qual. Life Res., 4(1):21–26. [doi:10.1007/BF00434379]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Holch, S., 2000. Practical Aspects of Standard Measurement of Quality-of-Life for In-Patient with an Electronic Quality-of-Life-Recorder. M.D. Thesis, University of ULM (in German).Google Scholar
  4. Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G., 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1):159–174. [doi:10.2307/2529310]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Li, L., Wang, H.M., Shen, Y., 2003. Chinese SF-36 health survey: translation, cultural adaptation, validation, and normalisation. J. Epidemiol. Community Health, 57(4):259–263. [doi:10.1136/jech.57.4.259]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ryan, J.M., Corry, J.R., Attewell, R., Smithson, M.J., 2002. A comparison of an electronic version of the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire to the standard paper version. Qual. Life Res., 11(1):19–26. [doi:10.1023/A:1014415709997]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Sigle, J., 1994. Quality of Life: Computer Assistant Measurement of Quality of Life. QL-Recorder Software Manual. Kunstvolle EDV & Elektronik (in German).Google Scholar
  8. Sigle, J., 1995. Practical Aspects of Quality-of-Life Measure: Standard Measurement of Quality-of-Life for Out-Patients with an Electronic Quality-of-Life-Recorder. M.D. Thesis, University of ULM (in German).Google Scholar
  9. Sigle, J., Porzsolt, F., 1996. Practical aspects of quality-of-life measurement: design and feasibility study of the quality-of-life recorder and the standardized measurement of quality of life in an out-patient clinic. Cancer Treat. Rev., 22(Suppl. A):75–89. [doi:10.1016/S0305-7372(96)90067-5]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Velikova, G., Wright, E.P., Smith, A.B., Cull, A., Gould, A., Forman, D., Perren, T., Stead, M., Brown, J., Selby, P.J., 1999. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J. Clin. Oncol., 17(3):998–1007.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ware, J.E., Sherbourne, C.D., 1992. The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med. Care, 30(6):473–483. [doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wilson, A.S., Kitas, G.D., Carruthers, D.M., Reay, C., Skan, J., Harris, S., Treharne, G.J., Young, S.P., Bacon, P.A., 2002. Computerized information-gathering in specialist rheumatology clinics: an initial evaluation of an electronic version of the Short Form 36. Rheumatology, 41(3):268–273. [doi:10.1093/rheumatology/41.3.268]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chen Tian-hui 
    • 1
    • 2
  • Li Lu 
    • 1
  • Sigle Joerg M. 
    • 3
  • Du Ya-ping 
    • 1
  • Wang Hong-mei 
    • 1
  • Lei Jun 
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Social Medicine and Family MedicineZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Medical Psychology and Medical SociologyUniversity of GoettingenGoettingenGermany
  3. 3.Scientific IT ConsultingDuderstadtGermany
  4. 4.Institute for InformaticsUniversity of GoettingenGoettingenGermany

Personalised recommendations