ArticleInternational journal of behavioral medicine2013
Development and psychometric testing of the Hemophilia Well-being Index.
Article in International journal of behavioral medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Haemophilia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021Review
- Patient satisfaction and acceptability of an on-demand and on-prophylaxis device for factor VIII delivery in patients with hemophilia A.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Measuring therapeutic relationship in the care of patients with haemophilia: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Article
- Health-related quality of life, developmental milestones, and self-esteem in young adults with bleeding disorders.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemophilia experts have recommended that screening tools should be introduced into clinical practice to assess patients' needs and perceptions. PURPOSE: The present work aims to describe the development of a brief instrument for the assessment of subjective well-being of men with hemophilia within an international study involving participants from 10 countries.
methodsSeveral steps were implemented toward achieving this objective: (1) literature review; (2) semistructured interviews in different Ibero-American countries; (3) exploratory qualitative content analysis of the interviews; (4) definition of the construct being evaluated; (5) generation of preliminary items; (6) interjudgment ratings of the items, by both patients and experts, to assess comprehension and review items; and (7) psychometric testing of an international sample of 342 patients with hemophilia.
resultsExploratory qualitative study allowed the development of an initial pool of items which address salient life domains related to well-being. Interjudgment ratings led to improvements in the wording and comprehensibilty of the preliminary pool of questions. Psychometric testing allowed items to be reviewed according to empirical criteria. The assessment of the underlying structure of the questionnaire by exploratory factor analysis (generalized least squares) showed a unidimensional model explaining 59.7 % of variance. Adequate internal consistency (0.91) and test-retest reliability (0.82) were observed for the instrument. Associations with other outcome measures and clinical indicators also provided a range of evidence for the instrument's validity.
conclusionsThis study presents a new disease-specific tool which is able to assess subjective well-being in hemophilia patients.The instrument is available in Spanish, Portuguese (Brazilian), and English language versions for use in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.