| Title |
Validation of the simplified Chinese version of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-31)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-015-4066-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chuanwen Zhou, Qianjun Li, Shushu Huang, Lu Fan, Bingjian Wang, Jian Dai, Xiaoming Tang |
| Abstract |
To translate quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-31) into a simplified Chinese version, and test its reliability and validity in osteoporosis patients from mainland Chinese population. Postmenopausal osteoporosis women with history of vertebral fracture were included as cases, and age-matched healthy female were included as controls. All subjects were from mainland China. The simplified Chinese version of QUALEFFO-31 and SF-36 were assigned to the two groups. Reliability was assessed using kappa statistics of agreement for each item and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's α. Pearson's correlation was used to assess convergent and discriminant validity. Overall, 66 cases and 66 age-matched controls were included. The ICC for the test-retest reliability ranged from 0.76 to 0.91. Cronbach's α for pain, physical function, and mental function domains were 0.94, 0.87, and 0.79, respectively. Convergent validity and discriminant validity showed that each correlation coefficient between score of each item with total score of related domain was higher than that with total score of unrelated domain. Pearson's correlation coefficients indicated significantly high correlations between corresponding domains of QUALEFFO-31 and SF-36. The simplified Chinese version of the QUALEFFO-31 is a reliable and valid outcome measure of functional status in patients with osteoporosis. This Chinese version of the QUALEFFO-31 can be utilized for future clinical studies in mainland China. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 47% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,278,422
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#3,654
of 4,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,573
of 264,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#62
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,633 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,495 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.