File Download
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
 
Supplementary

Article: Is the content of the Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) really valid in the context of traditional Chinese medicine in Hong Kong?
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleIs the content of the Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) really valid in the context of traditional Chinese medicine in Hong Kong?
 
AuthorsWong, W1
Lam, CLK1
Leung, KF2
Zhao, L3
 
Issue Date2009
 
PublisherChurchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/09652299
 
CitationComplementary Therapies In Medicine, 2009, v. 17 n. 1, p. 29-36 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2008.07.004
 
AbstractBackground: Content validity is crucial in quality of life instrument development but there is very little literature on this in Chinese culture. The Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) was developed in Mainland China to capture the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) concepts specific to traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the content validity of ChQOL in a Chinese population whose spoken dialect and health-care system are different from those of Mainland China to find out whether the instrument is generalizable. Methods: 8 TCM practitioners and 10 patients rated the clarity, relevance and appropriateness of each of the 50 items of the ChQOL (HK version), and completed qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews. Results: The content of ChQOL was rated valid by TCM practitioners with CVIs on clarity, relevance and appropriateness ranging from 80 to 100%. 49 out of 50 items were well understood by patients, but 12 items had CVI on relevance and 5 items had CVI on appropriateness lower than 70% among patients. After reviewing the patients and TCM practitioners' opinions, revisions were made for three items (2, 8 and 29) to form the ChQOL (HK version)-2008. In general, the ChQOL was found to be too long which called for shorter version. Conclusions: The content of ChQOL was shown to be really valid in the context of Chinese Medicine for Cantonese speaking Chinese. There was some discrepancy between the judgments of TCM practitioners and patients indicating the importance of evaluation by both experts and lay persons. Crown Copyright © 2008.
 
ISSN0965-2299
2013 Impact Factor: 2.216
2013 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.547
 
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2008.07.004
 
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000262887900005
 
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorWong, W
 
dc.contributor.authorLam, CLK
 
dc.contributor.authorLeung, KF
 
dc.contributor.authorZhao, L
 
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T07:42:17Z
 
dc.date.available2010-09-06T07:42:17Z
 
dc.date.issued2009
 
dc.description.abstractBackground: Content validity is crucial in quality of life instrument development but there is very little literature on this in Chinese culture. The Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) was developed in Mainland China to capture the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) concepts specific to traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the content validity of ChQOL in a Chinese population whose spoken dialect and health-care system are different from those of Mainland China to find out whether the instrument is generalizable. Methods: 8 TCM practitioners and 10 patients rated the clarity, relevance and appropriateness of each of the 50 items of the ChQOL (HK version), and completed qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews. Results: The content of ChQOL was rated valid by TCM practitioners with CVIs on clarity, relevance and appropriateness ranging from 80 to 100%. 49 out of 50 items were well understood by patients, but 12 items had CVI on relevance and 5 items had CVI on appropriateness lower than 70% among patients. After reviewing the patients and TCM practitioners' opinions, revisions were made for three items (2, 8 and 29) to form the ChQOL (HK version)-2008. In general, the ChQOL was found to be too long which called for shorter version. Conclusions: The content of ChQOL was shown to be really valid in the context of Chinese Medicine for Cantonese speaking Chinese. There was some discrepancy between the judgments of TCM practitioners and patients indicating the importance of evaluation by both experts and lay persons. Crown Copyright © 2008.
 
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
 
dc.identifier.citationComplementary Therapies In Medicine, 2009, v. 17 n. 1, p. 29-36 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2008.07.004
 
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2008.07.004
 
dc.identifier.epage36
 
dc.identifier.hkuros152596
 
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000262887900005
 
dc.identifier.issn0965-2299
2013 Impact Factor: 2.216
2013 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.547
 
dc.identifier.issue1
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.pmid19114226
 
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-58149109419
 
dc.identifier.spage29
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/78384
 
dc.identifier.volume17
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.publisherChurchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/09652299
 
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom
 
dc.relation.ispartofComplementary Therapies in Medicine
 
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
 
dc.subject.meshChina
 
dc.subject.meshFemale
 
dc.subject.meshHong Kong
 
dc.subject.meshHumans
 
dc.subject.meshMale
 
dc.subject.meshMedical History Taking - methods - standards
 
dc.subject.meshMedicine, Chinese Traditional
 
dc.subject.meshQuality of Life
 
dc.subject.meshQuestionnaires - standards
 
dc.titleIs the content of the Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) really valid in the context of traditional Chinese medicine in Hong Kong?
 
dc.typeArticle
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Wong, W</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Lam, CLK</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Leung, KF</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Zhao, L</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2010-09-06T07:42:17Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2010-09-06T07:42:17Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2009</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>Complementary Therapies In Medicine, 2009, v. 17 n. 1, p. 29-36</identifier.citation>
<identifier.issn>0965-2299</identifier.issn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/78384</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>Background: Content validity is crucial in quality of life instrument development but there is very little literature on this in Chinese culture. The Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) was developed in Mainland China to capture the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) concepts specific to traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the content validity of ChQOL in a Chinese population whose spoken dialect and health-care system are different from those of Mainland China to find out whether the instrument is generalizable. Methods: 8 TCM practitioners and 10 patients rated the clarity, relevance and appropriateness of each of the 50 items of the ChQOL (HK version), and completed qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews. Results: The content of ChQOL was rated valid by TCM practitioners with CVIs on clarity, relevance and appropriateness ranging from 80 to 100%. 49 out of 50 items were well understood by patients, but 12 items had CVI on relevance and 5 items had CVI on appropriateness lower than 70% among patients. After reviewing the patients and TCM practitioners&apos; opinions, revisions were made for three items (2, 8 and 29) to form the ChQOL (HK version)-2008. In general, the ChQOL was found to be too long which called for shorter version. Conclusions: The content of ChQOL was shown to be really valid in the context of Chinese Medicine for Cantonese speaking Chinese. There was some discrepancy between the judgments of TCM practitioners and patients indicating the importance of evaluation by both experts and lay persons. Crown Copyright &#169; 2008.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<publisher>Churchill Livingstone. The Journal&apos;s web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/09652299</publisher>
<relation.ispartof>Complementary Therapies in Medicine</relation.ispartof>
<subject.mesh>China</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Female</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Hong Kong</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Humans</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Male</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Medical History Taking - methods - standards</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Medicine, Chinese Traditional</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Quality of Life</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Questionnaires - standards</subject.mesh>
<title>Is the content of the Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) really valid in the context of traditional Chinese medicine in Hong Kong?</title>
<type>Article</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=0965-2299&amp;volume=17&amp;spage=29&amp;epage=36&amp;date=2008&amp;atitle=Is+the+Content+of+the+Chinese+Quality+of+Life+Instrument+(ChQOL)+Really+Valid+in+the+Context+of+Traditional+Chinese+Medicine+in+Hong+Kong?</identifier.openurl>
<description.nature>Link_to_subscribed_fulltext</description.nature>
<identifier.doi>10.1016/j.ctim.2008.07.004</identifier.doi>
<identifier.pmid>19114226</identifier.pmid>
<identifier.scopus>eid_2-s2.0-58149109419</identifier.scopus>
<identifier.hkuros>152596</identifier.hkuros>
<relation.references>http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-58149109419&amp;selection=ref&amp;src=s&amp;origin=recordpage</relation.references>
<identifier.volume>17</identifier.volume>
<identifier.issue>1</identifier.issue>
<identifier.spage>29</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>36</identifier.epage>
<identifier.isi>WOS:000262887900005</identifier.isi>
<publisher.place>United Kingdom</publisher.place>
</item>
Author Affiliations
  1. The University of Hong Kong Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine
  2. Queen Elizabeth Hospital Hong Kong
  3. Chinese University of Hong Kong