Validation of the Portuguese version of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) in Brazilian women with postmenopausal osteoporosis with vertebral fracture
Clinical Rheumatology, ISSN: 0770-3198, Vol: 32, Issue: 11, Page: 1585-1592
2013
- 12Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations12
- Citation Indexes12
- 12
- CrossRef5
- Captures29
- Readers29
- 29
Article Description
To validate the Portuguese version of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) in Brazilian women with osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VF). A questionnaire validation study of 86 postmenopausal women was conducted. Women were divided into two groups: 43 in a group with VF and 43 in a group without osteoporosis, age-matched (±3 years). The QUALEFFO-41 questionnaire was administered twice in 4 weeks and compared to a generic questionnaire SF-36. For analysis of the QUALEFFO-41, internal consistency, repeatability, and discriminant capacity between VF patients and control patients were assessed. The significance level adopted was 5 %. The mean age of the women was 66.1 ± 7.2 years for the group with VF and 64.9 ± 6.3 years for the control group (p = 0.4259). The QUALEFFO showed adequate internal consistency in all domains (Cronbach's α of 0.74 to 0.84) and good repeatability (ICC of domains = 0.67-0.90). Of the total questions, 92.6 % demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity, and 95 % of the questions showed good discriminant validity. The mean scores of both questionnaires were significantly higher in the group with VF. There was a good correlation among the QUALEFFO-41 domains and their corresponding SF-36 domains, except for social function. All QUALEFFO-41 domains were significantly predictive of VF on assessment of the ROC curve. The Portuguese version of the QUALEFFO-41 may be used in Brazilian women with osteoporotic VF because it shows good reliability, repeatability, and validity. It was also shown to impair quality of life (QOL) in women with VF and had good ability to discriminate QOL in women with osteoporotic VF. © 2013 Clinical Rheumatology.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84886309244&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10067-013-2265-8; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23609409; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10067-013-2265-8; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10067-013-2265-8; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10067-013-2265-8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know