ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Assessing health-related quality of life using the Wound-QoL-17 and the Wound-QoL-14-Results of the cross-sectional European HAQOL study using item response theory.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intent to Treat Analysis of the Primary and Secondary Outcomes for the ODINN Intact Fish Skin Graft for Deep Diabetic Foot Wounds Trial.International wound journal · 2026Trial
- Lesional pruritus in pyoderma gangrenosum: Present but not predominant.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2026Article
- Validation of the Spanish Version of the Wound-QoL-14 Wound-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of Wound-QoL-14 Quality of Life Questionnaire in Patients With Diabetes Related Foot Ulcers.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Content validation of the Wound-QoL questionnaire measuring quality of life in chronic wounds - a qualitative study in patients with leg ulcers and diabetic foot ulcers.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- How to Interpret Quality of Life Assessment of Patients With Chronic Wounds Using the Wound-QoL.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Assessing health-related quality of life using the Wound-QoL-17 and the Wound-QoL-14-Results of the cross-sectional European HAQOL study using item response theory.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For assessing health-related quality of life in patients with chronic wounds, the Wound-QoL questionnaire has been developed. Two different versions exist: the Wound-QoL-17 and the Wound-QoL-14. For international and cross-cultural comparisons, it is necessary to demonstrate psychometric properties in an international study. Therefore, the aim of this study was to test both questionnaires in a European sample, using item response theory (IRT). Participants were recruited in eight European countries. Item characteristic curves (ICC), item information curves (IIC) and differential item functioning (DIF) were calculated. In both questionnaires, ICCs for most items were well-ordered and sufficiently distinct. For items, in which adjacent response categories were not sufficiently distinct, response options were merged. IICs showed that items on sleep and on pain, on worries as well as on day-to-day and leisure activities had considerably high informational value. In the Wound-QoL-14, the item on social activities showed DIFs regarding the country and age. The same applied for the Wound-QoL-17, in which also the item on stairs showed DIFs regarding age. Our study showed comparable results across both versions of the Wound-QoL. We established a new scoring method, which could be applied in international research projects. For clinical practice, the original scoring can be maintained.
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.