Reliability and validity of the Portuguese version of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0)

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 691-696

  Gonçalves, Rui Soles ^a,b   Gil, João Neves ^a,b   Cavalheiro, Luís Manuel ^a,b   Costa, Rui Dias ^c   Ferreira, Pedro Lopes ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^b POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AVEIRO   (Portugal)

^d UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Health status; Reliability; SIS 2.0; Stroke; Validity

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PORTUGAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD; STROKE; VALIDATION STUDY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PORTUGAL; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; STROKE;

EID: 84863610861     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-011-9977-5     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Melo, T. P., & Ferro, J. M. (2003). Stroke units and stroke services in Portugal. Cerebrovascular Disease, 15(Suppl 1), 21-22. (Pubitemid 36359455)
2. Truelsen, T., Piechowski-Jozwiak, B., Bonita, R., Mathers, C., Bogousslavsky, J., & Boysen, G. (2006). Stroke incidence and prevalence in Europe: A review of available data. European Journal of Paediatric Neurolog, 13, 581-598. (Pubitemid 43873630)
3. Carod-Artal, F. J., & Egido, J. A. (2009). Quality of life after stroke: The importance of a good recovery. Cerebrovascular Disease, 27(Suppl 1), 204-214.
4. Wolfe, C. D. (2000). The impact of stroke. British Medical Bulletin, 56, 275-286.
5. Beaton, D. E., & Schemitsch, E. (2003). Measures of healthrelated quality of life and physical function. Clinics Orthopedic, 413, 90-105. (Pubitemid 38063303)
6. Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., & Jones D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment 2: i-iv, 1-74.
7. Duncan, P. W., Wallace, D., Lai, S. M., Johnson, D., Embretson, S., & Laster, L. J. (1999). The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke, 30, 2131-2140. (Pubitemid 29473260)
8. Gowland, C., Stratford, P., Ward, M., Moreland, J., Torresin, W., Van Hullenaar, S., et al. (1993). Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster stroke assessment. Stroke, 24, 58-63. (Pubitemid 23014383)
9. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 34-42. (Pubitemid 44856236)
10. Fermanian, J. (1984). Measuring agreement between 2 observers: A quantitative case. Revue d'épidémiologie et de santé publique, 32, 408-413. (Pubitemid 15126983)
11. Duncan, P. W., Bode, R. K., Min Lai, S., & Perera, S. (2003). Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: The Stroke Impact Scale. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84, 950-963. (Pubitemid 36835117)
12. Edwards, B., & O'Connell, B. (2003). Internal consistency and validity of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) and SIS-16 in an Australian sample. Quality of Life Research, 12, 1127-1135. (Pubitemid 37386640)
13. Geyh, S., Cieza, A., & Stucki, G. (2009). Evaluation of the German translation of the Stroke Impact Scale using Rasch analysis. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 978-995.
14. Duncan, P. W., Reker, D. M., Horner, R. D., Samsa, G. P., Hoenig, H., LaClair, B. J., et al. (2002). Performance of a mailadministered version of a stroke-specific outcome measure, the Stroke Impact Scale. Clinics Rehabilitation, 16, 493-505.
15. Duncan, P. W., Lai, S. M., Tyler, D., Perera, S., Reker, D. M., & Studenski, S. (2002). Evaluation of proxy responses to the Stroke Impact Scale. Stroke, 33, 2593-2599. (Pubitemid 35266429)