ArticlePloS one2025
Validation and adaptation of the Arabic version of health-related quality of life with six domains (HRQ-6D): A factor and Rasch analyses study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth-related quality of life (HRQOL) provides a complete picture of patients' overall health status and should be evaluated in all patients encountered. To accurately assess patients' HRQOL a comprehensive validated tool is necessary. Therefore, the present study aimed to validate the Arabic version of the Health-Related Quality of Life with Six Domains (Ar-HRQ-6D) scale.
methodsThis cross-sectional study utilized an online questionnaire targeting adult Jordanians and implemented several validation steps to ensure the adequacy of the Ar-HRQ-6D. These steps included the application of the forward-backward translation technique, assessment of the content and face validity of the questionnaire, evaluation of internal consistency, validation of the construct through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis, and assessment of the questionnaire's predictive capabilities.
resultsA total of 808 participants (63% female) completed the Ar-HRQ-6D. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) supported the suitability of the original three-factor model for the present study data, yielding acceptable model fit indices (χ²/df = 4.1, SRMR = 0.03, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.96, CIF = 0.98, and TLI = 0.97) and factor loadings ranging from 0.63 to 0.86. Cronbach's alpha for the three factors ranged from 0.81 to 0.90, confirming the high reliability of the questionnaire. Rasch analysis further validated the person and item separation reliability for the three factors. Additionally, all items of the Ar-HRQ-6D fell within the acceptable infit and outfit ranges. All thresholds were appropriately ordered, ranging from -5.27 to 2.86. Significant differences were observed in the median Ar-HRQ-6D scores across the various health status categories (p < 0.001), with the healthy category showing significantly higher median scores than the other categories. These findings confirm the predictive validity of the Ar-HRQ-6D.
conclusionThe study confirmed the reliability, validity, and predictive accuracy of the Arabic version of the Ar-HRQ-6D. This tool is suitable for assessing patients' HRQOL across various medical settings.
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.