Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38710959›Full record

ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2024

Content validity of SarQoL, a quality of life questionnaire specific to sarcopenia.

C Demonceau, B Voz, O Bruyère, J-Y Reginster, C Beaudart

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

5 authors.

C DemonceauDepartment of Public Health, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium. celine.demonceau@uliege.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7089-6605
B VozDepartment of Public Health, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5358-7648
O BruyèreDepartment of Public Health, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4269-9393
J-Y ReginsterCollege of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6290-752X
C BeaudartClinical Pharmacology and Toxicology Research Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, NAmur Research Institute for LIfe Sciences (NARILIS), University of Namur, Namur, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0827-5303

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Sarcopenia & Quality of Life (SarQoL) questionnaire is a patient-reported outcome measure designed for assessing health-related quality of life in individuals with sarcopenia. Despite its wide acceptance in the scientific literature, its content validity has only been partially demonstrated so far.

aimsTo enhance the evidence supporting the content validity of the SarQoL questionnaire.

methodsFollowing COSMIN methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 Belgian older adults who met the EWGSOP2 criteria for the diagnosis of sarcopenia and 11 experts in sarcopenia, with clinical or research background. Comprehensiveness, relevance and comprehensibility of SarQoL content were assessed through individual transcripts and were qualitatively analyzed thematically according to the seven dimensions of SarQoL.

resultsThe majority of the concepts elicited during the semi-structured interviews fitted within existing SarQoL dimensions. Importantly, the different domains of SarQoL were consensually considered as relevant by patients and experts. Some new emergent concepts were identified by the participants. While many of them could be considered as enrichments of existing dimensions or sub-concepts, other new concepts (i.e. self-fulfilment, acceptance of the reduced condition, adaptation/use of strategies, depression) may highlight two potential dimensions not covered by SarQoL, i.e. patient empowerment and depression. Cognitive interviews also highlighted that SarQoL items and instructions were clear and comprehensible.

conclusionsSarQoL, in its current form, demonstrates good evidence of content validity for assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sarcopenia. We do not recommend adding new items or dimensions to SarQoL. Instead, for researchers or clinicians who aim to specifically address self-empowerment or depression of sarcopenic populations, we suggest completing the assessment of quality of life by concurrently using additional validated scales of patient empowerment or depression.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeSarcopeniaAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesContent validityHealth-related quality of lifeSarcopeniaSarQoL

Identifiers

PMID38710959
PMCPMC11074221

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.