Does being bilingual in English and Chinese influence responses to quality-of-life scales?

Medical Care

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 105-112

  Thumboo, Julian ^a,d   Fong, Kok Yong ^b   Machin, David ^c   Chan, Siew Pang ^a   Soh, Chang Heok ^a   Leong, Keng Hong ^a   Feng, Pao Hsii ^a   Thio, Szu Tien ^a   Boey, Mee Leng ^a  

^a TAN TOCK SENG HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^c MINISTRY OF HEALTH   (Singapore)

^d NATIONAL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Asia; Ethnic groups; Multilingualism; Quality of life; Singapore

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SINGAPORE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTILINGUALISM; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SINGAPORE;

EID: 0036479486     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200202000-00005     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Ware JE Jr, Keller SD, Gandek B, et al. Evaluating translations of health status questionnaires. Methods from the IQOLA project. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1995;11:525-551.
2. Chang AM, Chau JPC, Holroyd E. Translation of questionnaires and issues of equivalence. J Adv Nurs 1999;29:316-322.
3. Segalowitz N. Skilled reading in the second language. In: Vaid J, ed. Language processing in bilinguals: psycholinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1986:3-20.
4. Hummel KM. Memory for bilingual prose. In: Vaid J, ed. Language processing in bilinguals: psycholinguistic and neuropsychologial perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1986:47-64.
5. Deyo R. Pitfalls in measuring the health status of Mexican Americans: comparative validity of the English and Spanish sickness impact profile. Am J Public Health 1984;74:569-573.
6. Cheung P. Yearbook of Statistics of Singapore. Singapore: Department of Statistics; 1993.
7. Thumboo J, Fong KY, Machin D, et al. A community-based study of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 in Singapore. Qual Life Res 2001;10:175-188.
8. Ware JE, Gandek B. Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:903-912.
9. Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.
10. Lam CL, Gandek B, Ren XS, et al. Tests of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the Chinese (HK) version of the SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1998:51:1139-1147.
11. Wagner AK, Gandek B, Aaronson NK, et al. Cross cultural comparisons of the content of SF-36 translations across 10 countries: results from the international quality of life assessment project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:925-932.
12. Sherbourne CD, Kamberg CJ. Social functioning: family and marital functioning measures. In: Stewart AL, Ware JE Jr, eds. Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach. Raleigh, NC: Duke University Press; 1992:183-193.
13. Thumboo J, Fong KY, Chan SP, et al. Validation of the medical outcomes study family and marital functioning measures in SLE patients in Singapore. Lupus 1999;8:514-520.
14. Thumboo J, Feng PH, Soh CH, et al. Validation of a Chinese version of the Medical Outcomes Study Family and Marital Functioning Measures in patients with SLE. Lupus 2000;9:702-707.
15. Ananth CV, Kleinbaum DG. Regression models tor ordinal responses: a review of methods and applications, Int J Epidemiol 1997;26:1323-1333.
16. Armstrong B, Sloan M. Ordinal regression models in epidemiologic data. Am J Epdiemiol 1989;129:191-204.
17. Agresti A. An introduction to categorical data analysis. New York, NY: Wiley; 1996.
18. Brazier J, Harper R, Jones N, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 1992;305:160-164.
19. Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Right L. Short form 36 (SF-36) health-survey questionnaire: normative data for adults of working age. BMJ 1993;306:1437-1440.
20. Regidor E, Barrio G, de la Fuente L, et al. Association between educational level and health related quality of life in Spanish adults. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999;53:75-82.
21. Francis WS. Congnitive integration of language and memory in bilinguals: semantic representation. Psychol Bull 1999;125:193-222.
22. Coons SJ, Alabdulmoshin SA, Draugalsi JR, et al. Reliability of an Arabic version of the RAND-36 health survey and it's equivalence to the US-English version. Med Care 1998;36:428-432.
23. Chan DW. The Chinese version of the general health questionnaire: does language make a difference? Psychol Med 1985;15:147-155.
24. Coons SJ, Alabdulmohsin SA, Draugalis JR, et al. Reliability of an Arabic version of the RAND-36 Health Survey and its equivalence to the US-English version. Med Care 1998;36:428-432.
25. Chang DF, Chun CA, Takeuchi DT, et al. SF-36 health survey: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability in a community sample of Chinese Americans. Med Care 2000;38:542-548.
26. Tan KS, Tan L, Earnest A, et al. Potentially modifiable psychosocial and treatment related factors influence quality of life in differentiated thyroid cancer survivors. Qual Life Res 2000;9:S250.
27. Kerry SM, Bland JM. Analysis of a trial randomized in clusters. BMJ 1998;316:54.
28. Moore CC, Romney AK, Hsia TL. Shared cognitive representations of perceptual and semantic structures of basic colors in Chinese and English. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2000;97:5007-5010.
29. Romney AK, Moore CC, Rusch CD. Cultural universals: measuring the semantic structure of emotion terms in English and Japanese. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1997;94:5489-5494.