Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34463861›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022

The ICECAP-A instrument for capabilities: assessment of construct validity and test-retest reliability in a general Dutch population.

Pieter J Rohrbach, Alexandra E Dingemans, Brigitte A Essers, Eric F Van Furth, Philip Spinhoven, Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Janine A Van Til, M Elske Van den Akker-Van Marle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Quality of life in patients with epilepsy in the context of socioeconomic challenges in Lebanon.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The assessment of psychometric properties for the subjective wellbeing-5 dimensions (SWB-5D) questionnaire in the general Dutch population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors.

Pieter J RohrbachDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0795-466X
Alexandra E DingemansGGZ Rivierduinen, Eating Disorders Ursula, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5499-7139
Brigitte A EssersDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-7114
Eric F Van FurthDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1131-0886
Philip SpinhovenDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4117-335X
Catharina G M Groothuis-OudshoornDepartment of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4875-5379
Janine A Van TilDepartment of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5416-5893
M Elske Van den Akker-Van MarleDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Section Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands. m.e.van_den_akker-van_marle@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5269-509X

Funding

ZonMw 636310001Zorg & Zekerheid ST.2019-24
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) assesses five capabilities that are important to one's well-being. The instrument might be an important addition to generic health questionnaires when evaluating quality of life extending beyond health. This study aimed to conduct a psychometric assessment of the Dutch translation of the ICECAP-A.

methodsConstruct validity of the instrument was assessed in two ways. First, by measuring correlations with the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and a measure of self-efficacy and, second, by investigating the ability to distinguish between groups known to differ on the construct the ICECAP-A means to capture. Additionally, test-retest reliability was evaluated.

resultsIn total, 1002 participants representative of the general Dutch population completed an online survey. For test-retest reliability, 252 participants completed the same questionnaire 2 weeks later. The ICECAP-A indicated moderate to strong correlations with the EQ-5D-5L and a strong correlation with self-efficacy. Furthermore, it was capable of differentiating known groups. Moreover, results indicated adequate test-retest reliability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.79.

conclusionIn summary, results suggest adequate test-retest reliability and construct validity and indicate that the ICECAP-A might be of added value, especially when considering areas outside of the traditional health intervention model.

Indexed as

EthnicityQuality of LifeAdultHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCapabilitiesKnown-group validityPsychometric assessmentWell-being

Identifiers

PMID34463861
PMCPMC8921020

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.