Psychometric properties of the Iranian interview-administered version of the World Health Organization's Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF): A population-based study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of the current study was to translate and validate the Iranian version of the WHOQOL-BREF.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A forward-backward translation procedure was followed to develop the Iranian version of the questionnaire. A stratified random sample of individuals aged 18 and over completed the questionnaire in Tehran, Iran. Psychometric properties of the instrument including reliability (internal consistency, and test-retest analysis), validity (known groups' comparison and convergent validity), and items' correlation with their hypothesized domains were assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In all 1164 individuals entered into the study. The mean age of the participants was 36.6 (SD = 13.2) years, and the mean years of their formal education was 10.7 (SD = 4.4). In general the questionnaire received well and all domains met the minimum reliability standards (Cronbach's alpha and intra-class correlation > 0.7), except for social relationships (alpha = 0.55). Performing known groups' comparison analysis, the results indicated that the questionnaire discriminated well between subgroups of the study samples differing in their health status. Since the WHOQOL-BREF demonstrated statistically significant correlation with the Iranian version of the SF-36 as expected, the convergent validity of the questionnaire was found to be desirable. Correlation matrix also showed satisfactory results in all domains except for social relationships.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study has provided some preliminary evidence of the reliability and validity of the WHOQOL-BREF to be used in Iran, though further research is required to challenge the problems of reliability in one of the dimensions and the instrument's factor structure.</p

Incidence of first primary central nervous system tumors in California, 2001–2005

We examined the incidence of first primary central nervous system tumors (PCNST) in California from 2001–2005. This study period represents the first five years of data collection of benign PCNST by the California Cancer Registry. California’s age-adjusted incidence rates (AAIR) for malignant and benign PCNST (5.5 and 8.5 per 100,000, respectively). Malignant PCNST were highest among non-Hispanic white males (7.8 per 100,000). Benign PCNST were highest among African American females (10.5 per 100,000). Hispanics, those with the lowest socioeconomic status, and those who lived in rural California were found to be significantly younger at diagnosis. Glioblastoma was the most frequent malignant histology, while meningioma had the highest incidence among benign histologies (2.6 and 4.5 per 100,000, respectively). This study is the first in the US to compare malignant to benign PCNST using a population-based data source. It illustrates the importance of PCNST surveillance in California and in diverse communities

An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The criteria for stopping Delphi studies are often subjective. This study aimed to examine whether consensus and stability in the Delphi process can be ascertained by descriptive evaluation of trends in participants' views.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A three round email-based Delphi required participants (n = 12) to verify their level of agreement with 8 statements, write comments on each if they considered it necessary and rank the statements for importance. Each statement was analysed quantitatively by the percentage of agreement ratings, importance rankings and the amount of comments made for each statement, and qualitatively using thematic analysis. Importance rankings between rounds were compared by calculating Kappa values to observe trends in how the process impacts on subject's views.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Evolution of consensus was shown by increase in agreement percentages, convergence of range with standard deviations of importance ratings, and a decrease in the number of comments made. Stability was demonstrated by a trend of increasing Kappa values.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Following the original use of Delphi in social sciences, Delphi is suggested to be an effective way to gain and measure group consensus in healthcare. However, the proposed analytical process should be followed to ensure maximum validity of results in Delphi methodology for improved evidence of consensual decision-making.</p