From the generic to the condition-specific? Instrument order effects in quality of life assessment

Medical Care

Volumn 41, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 777-790

  McColl, Elaine ^a   Eccles, Martin Paul ^a   Rousseau, Nicolette Sarah ^a   Steen, Ian Nicholas ^a   Parkin, David William ^a,b   Grimshaw, Jeremy Michael ^c,d  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^d OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Health related quality of life; Methodology; Outcome assessment; Quality of life; Surveys

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; ARTICLE; ASTHMA; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; SEX DIFFERENCE; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGINA PECTORIS; ASTHMA; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REACTION TIME; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 0038342601     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200307000-00002     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Patrick DL, Deyo RA. Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med Care 1989;27(Suppl):S217-S232.
2. Guyatt G, Feeny D, Patrick D. Issues in qualityof-life measurement in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1991;12:81S-90S.
3. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, et al. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:i-iv, 1-74.
4. Lucas CP. The order effect: reflections on the validity of multiple test presentations. Psychol Med 1992;22:197-202.
5. Sprangers MAG, Cull A, Bjordal K, et al. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to quality of life assessment: guidelines for developing questionnaire modules. Qual Life Res 1993;2:287-295.
6. Sprangers MAG, Cull A, Bjordal K, et al. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. Qual Life Res 1998;7:291-300.
7. Juniper E. Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire: Background Information and Interviewing Tips. Hamilton, Ontario: QoL Technologies; 1990.
8. Heberlein TA, Baumgartner R. Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: a quantitative analysis of the published literature. Am Sociol Rev 1978;43:447-462.
9. Bradburn NM, Mason WM. The effect of question order on responses. J Marketing Res 1964;l:57-64.
10. Schuman H, Presser S. Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording and Content. New York: Academic Press; 1981.
11. Martin JD, McConnell JP. Mail questionnaire response induction: the effect of four variables on the response of a random sample to a difficult questionnaire. Soc Sei Q 1970;51:409-414.
12. Roberson MT, Sundstrom E. Questionnaire design, return rates, and response favorableness in an employee attitude questionnaire. J Appl Psychol 1990;75:354-357.
13. Tourangeau R, Rasinski KA, Bradburn N, et al. Belief accessibility and context effects in attitude measurement. J Exp Soc Psychol 1989;25:401-421.
14. Tourangeau R, Rasinski KA, Bradburn N, et al. Carryover effects in attitude surveys. Public Opinion Q 1989;53:495-524.
15. Tourangeau R, Rasinski KA. Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychol Bull 1988;103:299-314.
16. Lebowitz MD, Burrows B. Comparison of questionnaires: the BMRC and NHLI respiratory questionnaires and a new self-completion questionnaire. Am Rev Respir Dis 1976;113:627-635.
17. Brunekreef B, Groot B, Rijcken B, et al. Reproducibility of childhood respiratory symptom questions. Eur Respir J 1992;5:930-935.
18. Kartman B, Stalhammer N-O, Johannesson M. Valuation of health changes with the contingent valuation method: a test of scope and question order effects. Health Econ 1996;5:531-541.
19. David KM, Ganiats TG, Miller C. Placement matters: stability of SF-36 EVFGP responses with varying placement of the question in the instrument. Qual Life Res 1999;8:623.
20. Briancon S, Empereur F, Guillemin F, et al. Effect of vas orientation and ordering of general perception of health vas within a quality of life questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1999;8:650.
21. Bardsley MJ, Astell S, McCalIum A, et al. The performance of three measures of health status in an outpatient diabetes population. Diabetes Med 1993; 10:619-626.
22. Barry MJ, Walker-Corkery E, Chang Y, et al. Measurement of overall and disease-specific health status: does the order of questionnaires make a difference? J Health Serv Res Policy 1996;l:20-27.
23. Wu AW, Jacobson DL, Berzon RA, et al. The effect of mode of administration on Medical Outcomes Study health ratings and EuroQol scores in AIDS. Qual Life Res 1997;6:3-10.
24. Letley L, Garratt A. Questionnaire length and internal reliability: a randomised study [poster presentation]. Society for Social Medicine 43rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Norwich, 2000.
25. Leidy NK, Legro M, Schmier J, et al. Does order of administration affect subject response on generic and condition-specific measures of health related quality of life? Qual Life Res 2000;9:337.
26. Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Steen N, et al. The design and analysis of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate computerised decision support in primary care: the COGENT Study. Fam Pract 2000;17:180-186.
27. McColl E, Eccles MP, Purves I, et al. Identifying "guideline eligible" patients through general practice computerised databases. Report No. 103. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Centre for Health Services Research; 2000.
28. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), I: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-483.
29. EuroQol Group. EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199-208.
30. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Epstein RS, et al. Evaluation of impairment of health related quality of life in asthma: development of a questionnaire for use in clinical trials. Thorax 1992;47:76-83.
31. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Ferrie PJ, et al. Measuring quality of life in asthma. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993;147:832-838.
32. Steen IN, Hutchinson A, McColl E, et al. Development of a symptom-based outcome measures for asthma. BMJ 1994;309:1065-1069.
33. Steen IN, McColl E. Developing and testing symptom based outcome measures. In: Hutchinson A, McColl E, Christie M, et al, eds. Health Outcome Measures for Primary and Outpatient Care. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Harwood Academic Publishers; 1996:23-44.
34. Spertus JA, Winder JA, Dewhurst TA, et al. Development and evaluation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire: a new functional status measure for coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995;25:333-341.
35. Sudman S, Bradburn N. Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1982.
36. Ware JE Jr, Snow KK, Kosinski M, et al. SF-36 Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Centre; 1993.
37. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, et al. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care 1995;33:AS264-AS279.
38. Jenkinson C, Layte R, Wright L, et al. The UK SF-36: An Analysis and Interpretation Manual. Oxford: Health Services Research Unit, University of Oxford; 1996.
39. Outcomes Research Group. EQ-5D Resource Pack. York, UK: University of York; 1998.
40. Goyder J. The Silent Minority: Nonrespondents on Sample Surveys. Cambridge, MA: The Polity Press; 1987.
41. Gardner MJ, Altman DG. Statistics with Confidence - Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. London, UK: British Medical Journal; 1989.
42. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989;27:S178-S189.
43. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:287-334.
44. Nunnally J, Bernstein JC. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
45. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG, Ames IO. Statistical Methods. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press; 1967.
46. McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1987.
47. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 1959;56:81.
48. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), II: psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993;31:247-263.
49. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, et al. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:81-87.
50. Ayidiya SA, McClendon MJ. Response effects in mail surveys. Public Opinion Q 1990;54:229-247.
51. Ferber R. Order bias in mail survey. J Marketing 1952;17:171-178.
52. Schwarz N, Hippler HJ. Subsequent questions may influence answers to preceding questions in mail surveys. Public Opinion Q 1995;59:93-97.
53. Krosnick JA. The threat of satisficing in surveys: the shortcuts respondents take in answering questions. Survey Methods Centre Newsletter 2000;20:4-8.
54. Tourangeau R. Attitudes as memory structures: belief sampling and context effects. In: Schwarz N, Sudman S, eds. Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research. New York: Springer Verlag; 1992:35-47.
55. Smith TW. Thoughts on the nature of context effects. In: Schwarz N, Sudman S, eds. Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research. New, York: Springer Verlag; 1992:163-184.
56. Campanelli PC, Martin EA, Rothgeb JM. The use of respondent and interviewer debriefing studies as a way to study response errors in survey data. Statistician 1991;40:253-264.
57. Oksenberg L, Cannell CF, Kalton G. New strategies for pretesting survey questions. J Official Stat 1991;7:349-365.