Cross-Cultural Inequivalence of Dermatology-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Psoriasis Patients

Nijsten, Tamar; Meads, David; Korte, J. de; Sampogna, Francesca; Gelfand, Joel M.; Ongenae, Katia; Evers, Andrea W M; Augustin, Matthias

doi:10.1038/sj.jid.5700875

Cited by 90 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although a comparative study of different categorization techniques in the same sample would have been very interesting, we were unable to do this due to the lack of a patient-based anchor in this study. In addition, validation studies are required to test the generalizability of the findings of this study in patient samples that differ in diagnosis, disease severity and cultural background because these factors may affect HRQOL assessment [2, 4, 13]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Categorization of Skindex-29 Scores Using Mixture Analysis

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although the Skindex-29 is among the most commonly used health-related quality of life instruments in dermatology, the interpretation of obtained scores is not well documented. Objective: To create categories of the scores of the Skindex-29. Methods: The Skindex-29 scores of454 Italian patients with 6 distinct skin diseases from a specialized center were analyzed using mixture analyses. The validity of the obtained categorizations was tested. Results: Mixture analysis showed 4 distinct components (categories) for the emotion and functioning scale and 5 for the symptom scale. The total Skindex-29 score was categorized into 4 levels. As expected, patients with inflammatory diseases had higher levels of impairment, those with vitiligo and alopecia areata had low symptom levels and those with nevi were predominantly located in the lower categories for each of the scales. Conclusion: The proposed categories of the Skindex-29 may ease the interpretation of obtained continuous scores.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Categorization of Skindex-29 Scores Using Mixture Analysis

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nijsten et al [26] discussed the problem of cross-cultural inequivalence of dermatology-specific QoL instruments. Even in the case of equal total QoL scores in patients from different countries, the difference between separate QoL item scores may be significant [27].…”

Section: The Problem Of Cross-cultural Inequivalence Of Hrqol Instrummentioning

confidence: 99%

The Evolution of Quality of Life Assessment and Use in Dermatology

Chernyshov¹

2019

Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The creation of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaire facilitated many studies on the impact of skin diseases on patients’ quality of life (QoL). Many national and international guidelines recommend QoL assessment in dermatology, and some of them contain detailed recommendations on treatment goals and changes of treatment approaches based on DLQI score banding and minimal clinically important difference. The methodology of QoL in strument development and validation is constantly becoming more rigorous. Initiatives on selection of core outcome sets for skin diseases are focused on clinical trials but may also be beneficial for clinicians. There are various benefits of using QoL information in clinical practice, but experience of this is very limited at the moment. QoL assessment in dermatology is a rapidly developing field with a gradual shift from theory to practice.

show abstract

“…The DLQI is a reliable and valid instrument [7,10,11] . However, it has fallen short in some other aspects of psychometric performance in particular unidimensionality and item bias [12][13][14][15] . Hongbo et al [16] have demonstrated a banding system to aid the interpretation of DLQI scores, but a frequent question still arises: what does a specific improvement, such as 2, 5 or 6 points, in a DLQI score mean to a patient (and to the physician)?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Responsiveness of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI): Further Data

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and its responsiveness to change in inflammatory skin diseases. Methods: A longitudinal study: at stage 1, patients completed the DLQI and a disease severity global question; at stage 2, a global rating of change in quality of life (QoL; Global Rating of Change Questionnaire, GRCQ) was added and used as an anchor to measure the MCID of the DLQI. Results: 192 patients completed stage 1 and 107 completed stage 2. The mean DLQI score at stage 1 was 9.8 and 7.4 at stage 2 with a mean change of 2.4 (p < 0.0001). 31 patients experienced a ‘small change' in their QoL (±3 and ±2) on the GRCQ. The mean corresponding change in DLQI scores was 3.3, which is regarded as the approximate MCID. Conclusions: Previous estimates of the MCID of the DLQI have varied from 3 to 5. Although this study demonstrated a MCID of 3.3, we recommend that the MCID in inflammatory skin diseases should be 4.

show abstract

Cross-Cultural Inequivalence of Dermatology-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Psoriasis Patients

Cited by 90 publications

References 29 publications

Categorization of Skindex-29 Scores Using Mixture Analysis

Categorization of Skindex-29 Scores Using Mixture Analysis

The Evolution of Quality of Life Assessment and Use in Dermatology

Determining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Responsiveness of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI): Further Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About