Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Can the Web-Form WHOQOL-BREF be an Alternative to the Paper-Form?

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test whether the web version is an alternative to the paper version of the short version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL-BREF). Two studies were conducted. Study 1 used crossover self-controlled trials with 80 participants to compare the web and paper versions and to determine the test–retest reliability of the web version. Study 2 used data from 1,016 web participants to analyze the internal consistency and concurrent and construct validity of the web version. The correlations of domain scores between the web and paper versions ranged from 0.71 to 0.85. Dependent t tests showed no significant differences in domain scores between these two versions. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) for test–retest reliability of web version ranged from 0.79 to 0.91. The Cronbach’s α for internal consistency reliability ranged from 0.60 to 0.83. Multiple regression models indicated that the web version has good concurrent validity. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the second-order hierarchical factor model also supported the construct validity of the web version. The web version of the WHOQOL-BREF can be the alternative to the paper version for health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1, 307–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bliven, B. D., Kaufman, S. E., & Spertus, J. A. (2001). Electronic collection of health-related quality of life data: Validity, time benefits, and patient preference. Quality of Life Research, 10, 15–22. doi:10.1023/A:1016740312904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, N., Donaldson, G., Moinpour, C., Haberman, M., Milliken, D., Markle, V., et al. (2005). Development, feasibility and compliance of a web-based system for very frequent QOL and symptom home self-assessment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Quality of Life Research, 14, 77–93. doi:10.1007/s11136-004-2394-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bushnell, D. M., Reilly, M. C., Galani, C., Martin, M. L., Ricci, J. F., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2006). Validation of electronic data capture (EDC) of the irritable bowel syndrome-quality of life measure (IBS-QOL), the work productivity and activity impairment questionnaire for irritable bowel syndrome (WPAI:IBS) and the EuroQol (EQ-5D). Value in Health, 9, 98–105. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00087.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlbring, P., Brunt, S., Bohman, S., Austin, D., Richards, J., Ost, L. G., et al. (2007). Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agoraphobia research. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1421–1434. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K. H., Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006). Applicability of the WHOQOL-BREF on early adolescence. Social Indicators Research, 79, 215–234. doi:10.1007/s11205-005-0211-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, D., Molenberghs, D., Fayers, P., & Machin, D. (1998). Aspects of incomplete quality of life data in randomized trials: II. Missing data forms. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 697–709. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980315/15)17:5/7<697::AID-SIM815>3.0.CO;2-Y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, J., Klinkenberg, W. D., Wiley, D., & McKinley, L. (2001). Insuring sample equivalence across Internet and paper-and-pencil assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 339–346. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00002-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, C. T., Hsiung, P. C., Yu, C. F., Chen, M. Y., & Wang, J. D. (2002). Validation of the World Health Organization quality of life instrument in patients with HIV infection. Quality of Life Research, 11, 753–762. doi:10.1023/A:1020870402019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fellinger, J., Holzinger, D., Dobner, U., Gerich, J., Lehner, R., Lenz, G., et al. (2005). An innovative and reliable way of measuring health-related quality of life and mental distress in the deaf community. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 40, 245–250. doi:10.1007/s00127-005-0862-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A. S., Panahian-Jand, M., Mccomb, F., Melegari, C., & Sharp, S. (2003). Characteristics of women with vulvar pain disorders: Responses to a Web-based survey. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 29(Suppl 1), 45–58. doi:10.1080/713847126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrero, J., & Meneses, J. (2006). Short Web-based versions of the perceived stress (PSS) and Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CESD) scales: A comparison to pencil and paper responses among Internet users. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 830–846. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: basic concepts and fundamental issues. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 1–15). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiung, P. C., Fang, C. T., Chang, Y. Y., Chen, M. Y., & Wang, J. D. (2005). Comparison of WHOQOL-BREF and SF-36 in patients with HIV infection. Quality of Life Research, 14, 141–150. doi:10.1007/s11136-004-6252-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H. F., Liang, W. M., Chiu, Y. N., & Lin, M. R. (2003). Suitability of the WHOQOL-BREF for community-dwelling older people in Taiwan. Age and Ageing, 32, 593–600. doi:10.1093/ageing/afg102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School (2007). Value-based competition. http://www.hbs.edu/rhc/value.html. Retrieved 23 July 2007.

  • International Society for Quality of Life Research (2007). Are patient reported outcomes ready for prime time? http://www.isoqol.org/. Retrieved 15 June 2007.

  • Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalichman, S. C., Weinhardt, L., Benotsch, E., & Cherry, C. (2002). Closing the digital divide in HIV/AIDS care: Development of a theory-based intervention to increase internet access. AIDS Care, 14, 523–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, T., Uchida, S., Tsuda, Y., & Eboshida, A. (2005). Computer-assisted measurement of perceived stress: An application for a community-based survey. Hiroshima Journal of Medical Sciences, 54, 61–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, H., & Kirk, S. A. (2003). Using pencil and paper, Internet and touch-tone phones for self-administered surveys: does methodology matter? Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 117–134. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00008-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, J. N., Chen, H. J., Chen, C. M., Chen, P. C., & Wang, J. D. (2006). Quality of life and climacteric complaints amongst women seeking medical advice in Taiwan: Assessment using the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. Climacteric, 9, 119–128. doi:10.1080/13697130600635292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, K. L., Tzeng, R. J., Wang, B. L., Lee, H. S., Amidon, R. L., & Kao, S. (2005). Health-related quality of life and health utility for the institutional elderly in Taiwan. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1169–1180. doi:10.1007/s11136-004-3061-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. H. (2003). Reliability of information provided by patients of a visual psychiatric clinic. Psychiatric Services (Washington, DC), 54, 1167–1168. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.54.8.1167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T. H. (2006). Missing data imputation in quality-of-life assessment: Imputation for WHOQOL-BREF. PharmacoEconomics, 24, 917–925. doi:10.2165/00019053-200624090-00008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T. H., Chang, H. Y., & Weng, W. S. (2003). The national health interview survey information: An overview. Journal of Taiwan Public Health, 22, 431–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangunkusumo, R. T., Moorman, P. W., Van Den Berg-de Ruiter, A. E., Van Der Lei, J., De Koning, H. J., & Raat, H. (2005). Internet-administered adolescent health questionnaires compared with a paper version in a randomized study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36, 70.e1–70.e6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, V. L., Skevington, S. M., & Osborn, M. (2004). Development of a pain and discomfort module for use with the WHOQOL-100. Quality of Life Research, 13, 1139–1152. doi:10.1023/B:QURE.0000031344.53009.eb.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenna, S. P., & Doward, L. C. (2004). Integrating patient-reported outcomes. Value in Health, 7, S9–S12. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.7s103.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, K. H., Berry, D. L., & Zierler, B. K. (2004). Computerized symptom and quality-of-life assessment for patients with cancer part II: Acceptability and usability. Oncology Nursing Forum, 31, E84–E89. doi:10.1188/04.ONF.E84-E89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, V. J., & Byrne, G. J. (2004). WHOQOL-BREF as a measure of quality of life in older patients with depression. International Psychogeriatrics, 16, 159–173. doi:10.1017/S1041610204000109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Teisberg, E. O. (2006). Redefining health care: Creating value-base competition on results. Boston: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouwer, F., Snoek, F. J., van der Ploeg, H. M., Heine, R. J., & Brand, A. N. (1998). A comparison of the standard and the computerized versions of the well-being questionnaire (WBQ) and the diabetes treatment satisfaction questionnaire (DTSQ). Quality of Life Research, 7, 33–38. doi:10.1023/A:1008832821181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. M., Corry, J. R., Attewell, R., & Smithson, M. J. (2002). A comparison of an electronic version of the SF-36 general health questionnaire to the standard paper version. Quality of Life Research, 11, 19–26. doi:10.1023/A:1014415709997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shek, D. T. L., Chan, Y. K., & Lee, P. S. N. (2005a). Quality of life in the global context: A Chinese response. Social Indicators Research, 71, 1–10. doi:10.1007/s11205-004-8035-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shek, D. T. L., Chan Y. K., & Lee, P. S. N. (Eds.) (2005b). Special Issue on “Quality of life research in Chinese, Western and global contexts”. Social Indicators Research, 71, 1–539. doi:10.1007/s11205-004-8035-x.

  • Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M. O’Connell, K. A. & WHOQOL Group. (2004). The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: Psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Quality of Life Research, 13, 299–310 (2004). doi:10.1023/B:QURE.0000018486.91360.00.

  • Taylor, W. J., Myers, J., Simpson, R. T., McPherson, K. M., & Weatherall, M. (2004). Quality of life of people with rheumatoid arthritis as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument, short form (WHOQOL-BREF): Score distributions and psychometric properties. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 51, 350–357. doi:10.1002/art.20398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (2007). PRO task force: Changing mode of administration of instruments/ePRO. http://ispor.org/TaskForce/ePROTF.asp. Retrieved 17 May 2007.

  • The WHOQOL group. (1993). Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a Quality of Life assessment instrument (the WHOQOL). Quality of Life Research, 2, 153–159. doi:10.1007/BF00435734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL gruop. (1995). The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science and Medicine, 41, 1403–1409. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-K.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL gruop. (1998). The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science and Medicine, 46, 1569–1585. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00009-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (2007). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. http://www.fda.gov/CDER/GUIDANCE/5460dft.pdf. Retrieved 17 May 2007.

  • Wang, Y. C., Lee, C. M., Lew-Ting, C. Y., Hsiao, C. K., Chen, D. R., & Chen, W. J. (2005). Survey of substance use among high school students in Taipei: Web-based questionnaire versus paper-and-pencil questionnaire. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 37, 289–295. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.03.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (1996). WHOQOL-BREF: Introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment—field trial version. Geneva: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, D. L., Aquilino, W. S., & Supple, A. J. (1998). A comparison of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil self-administered questionnaires in a survey on smoking, alcohol, and drug use. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 331–353. doi:10.1086/297849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2007). Examining the relationship between global and domain measures of quality of life by three factor structure models. Social Indicators Research, 84, 189–202. doi:10.1007/s11205-006-9082-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, S. C., Kuo, P. W., Wang, J. D., Lin, M. I., & Su, S. (2005). Quality of life and its determinants of hemodialysis patients in Taiwan measured by WHOQOL-BREF(TW). American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 46, 635–641. doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2005.06.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., Chung, C. W., Yu, C. F., & Wang, J. D. (2002). Development and verification of validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 101, 342–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., Wu, C. H., & Yang, C. T. (2008). Examining the content validity of the WHOQOL-BREF from respondents’ perspective by quantitative methods. Social Indicators Research, 85, 483–498. doi:10.1007/s11205-007-9112-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., & Wu, C. H. Similarities and differences among three Chinese versions of the WHOQOL-Questionnaire: Comparisons of Taiwan version to the China and Hong-Kong versions. Social Indicators Research, in press.

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to Mrs. Su-Yueh Weng who is of considerable assistance to the authors. We owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. Shian-Tang Lin, and Mrs. Min-Ling Lai who provided computer-technology support and conducted a promotion activity to encourage the public to visit the website to measure their HR-QOL. This study was partially supported by a grant from the National Health Research Institutes (No. NHRI- EX 95-9204PP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Occupational Medicine and Industrial Hygiene, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Wen-Ching Chen & Jung-Der Wang

  2. Yuli Hospital, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taiwan

    Wen-Ching Chen

  3. Department of Internal Medicine and Department of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

    Jung-Der Wang

  4. Institute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

    Jing-Shiang Hwang

  5. Song De Branch, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chiao-Chicy Chen

  6. Department of Psychology, College of Science, National Taiwan University, No. 1, Sect. 4, Roosevelt Road, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan

    Chia-Huei Wu & Grace Yao

Authors
  1. Wen-Ching Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jung-Der Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jing-Shiang Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chiao-Chicy Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chia-Huei Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Grace Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grace Yao.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 6, 7 and 8.

Table 6 Correlation matrix of the four domains scores across web and paper versions for Group 1 in Study 1 (n = 34)
Full size table
Table 7 Correlation matrix of the four domains scores across web and paper versions for Group 2 in Study 1 (n = 38)
Full size table
Table 8 Correlation matrix of the four domains scores across T1 and T2 for Group 3 in Study 1 (n = 60)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, WC., Wang, JD., Hwang, JS. et al. Can the Web-Form WHOQOL-BREF be an Alternative to the Paper-Form?. Soc Indic Res 94, 97–114 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9355-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9355-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation