Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33782793›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2021

Development and validation of a short version of the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire: the SF-SarQoL.

A Geerinck, C Beaudart, J-Y Reginster, M Locquet, C Monseur, S Gillain, O Bruyère

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Analysis of Structural Characteristics and Psychometric Properties of the SarQoLInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

A GeerinckDivision of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. anton.geerinck@uliege.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1669-0224
C BeaudartDivision of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
J-Y ReginsterDivision of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
M LocquetDivision of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
C MonseurDepartment of Education Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
S GillainGeriatrics Department, University Hospital of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
O BruyèreDivision of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo facilitate the measurement of quality of life in sarcopenia, we set out to reduce the number of items in the previously validated Sarcopenia Quality of Life (SarQoL

methodsThe item reduction process was carried out in two phases. First, information was gathered through item-impact scores from older people (n = 1950), a Delphi method with sarcopenia experts, and previously published clinimetric data. In the second phase, this information was presented to an expert panel that decided which of the items to include in the short form. The newly created SFSarQoL was then administered to older, community-dwelling participants who previously participated in the SarcoPhAge study. We examined discriminative power, internal consistency, construct validity, test-retest reliability, structural validity and examined item parameters with a graded response model (IRT).

resultsThe questionnaire was reduced from 55 to 14 items, a 75% reduction. A total of 214 older, community-dwelling people were recruited for the validation study. The clinimetric evaluation showed that the SF-SarQoL

conclusionsA new, 14-item, short form version of the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire has been developed and shows good clinimetric properties.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeSarcopeniaActivities of Daily LivingAgedFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesItem reductionItem response theoryQuality of lifeQuestionnaire developmentSarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID33782793
PMCPMC8298237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.