Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2002 May;11(3):193-205.
doi: 10.1023/a:1015291021312.

Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria

Affiliations
Review

Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria

Neil Aaronson et al. Qual Life Res. 2002 May.

Abstract

The field of health status and quality of life (QoL) measurement - as a formal discipline with a cohesive theoretical framework, accepted methods, and diverse applications--has been evolving for the better part of 30 years. To identify health status and QoL instruments and review them against rigorous criteria as a precursor to creating an instrument library for later dissemination, the Medical Outcomes Trust in 1994 created an independently functioning Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). In the mid-1990s, the SAC defined a set of attributes and criteria to carry out instrument assessments; 5 years later, it updated and revised these materials to take account of the expanding theories and technologies upon which such instruments were being developed. This paper offers the SAC's current conceptualization of eight key attributes of health status and QoL instruments (i.e., conceptual and measurement model; reliability; validity; responsiveness; interpretability; respondent and administrative burden; alternate forms; and cultural and language adaptations) and the criteria by which instruments would be reviewed on each of those attributes. These are suggested guidelines for the field to consider and debate; as measurement techniques become both more familiar and more sophisticated, we expect that experts will wish to update and refine these criteria accordingly.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Med Care. 2000 Sep;38(9 Suppl):II194-208 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Nov;51(11):1189-202 - PubMed
    1. Psychol Bull. 1993 Nov;114(3):552-66 - PubMed
    1. Qual Life Res. 1995 Aug;4(4):293-307 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources