Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A community-based study of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 in Singapore

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scaling assumptions and validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) short form 36 health survey (SF-36) were assessed in a community-based survey of 5503 Chinese, Malays and Indians in Singapore using the international quality of life assessment project approach of item and scale level validation. Missing data for SF-36 items and scales occurred in less than 1.0% of subjects. Item level validation of both versions generally supported assumptions underlying Likert scoring and hypothesised item-order clustering. Item level factor analysis supported the eight-scale structure of the SF-36. In scale level validation, SF-36 scale scores showed wide variability and acceptable internal-consistency reliability (Cronbach's α > 0.70 for six English and seven Chinese scales), conformed to hypothesised patterns and generally varied according to hypotheses in subjects known to differ in quality of life. Scale level factor analysis of both versions yielded very similar patterns of factor correlation, comparable to that found in Japan, but differing from that seen in Western populations. Taken together, these results support the validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 versions in the multi-ethnic Asian socio-cultural context of Singapore.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) I: Conceptual framework and item selection Med Care 1991; 30: 473-483.

    Google Scholar 

  2. McHorney C, Ware JEJ, Raczek A. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247-263.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. McHorney C, Ware JEJ, Lu J, Sherbourne C. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994; 32: 40-66.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Manocchia M, Bayliss MS, Conner J. F-36 Health Survey Annotated Bibliography. Boston: Health Assessment Lab, New England Medical Center, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ware JE, Gandek B. Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the international quality of life assessment project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 903-912.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ware JE Jr, Keller SD, Gandek B, Brazier JE, Sullivan M. Evaluating translations of health status questionnaires. Methods from the IQOLA project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1995; 11: 525-551.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lau KE. Singapore Census of Population 1990: Literacy, Languages Spoken and Education: Statistical Release 3. Singapore: Department of Statistics, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Thumboo J, Fong KY, Ng TP, et al. Validation of the MOS SF-36 for quality of life assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus patients in Singapore. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 97-102.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Thumboo J, Feng PH, Soh CH, Boey ML, Thio ST, Fong KY. Validation of the Chinese SF-36 for quality of life assessment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2000; 9: 708-712.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide, 1993. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 3: 20-21.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lam CL, Gandek B, Ren XS, Chan MS. Tests of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the Chinese (HK) version of the SF-36 health survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1139-1147.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wagner AK, Gandek B, Aaronson NK, et al. Cross cultural comparisons of the content of SF-36 translations across 10 countries: Results from the international quality of life assessment project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 925-932.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ware JE, Gandek B. Methods for testing data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability: The IQOLA project approach. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 945-952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ware JE, Gandek B. Methods for validating and norming translations of health status questionnaires: The IQOLA project approach. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 953-959.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics Notes: Cronbach's alpha. Br Med J 1997; 314: 572.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Gandek B, et al. The factor structure of the SF-36 Health Survey in 10 countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International quality of life assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1159-1165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sharma S. Applied Multivariate Techniques. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1996; 90-143.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Brazier J, Harper R, Jones N, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: New outcome measure for primary care. Br Med J 1992; 305: 160-164.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sullivan M, Karlsson J. The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey III. Evaluation of criterion-based validity: Results from normative population. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1105-1113.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnson P, Goldman L, Orav E, Garcia T, Pearson S, Lee T. Comparison of the medical outcomes study short-form 36-item health survey in black patients and white patients with acute chest pain. Med Care 1995; 33: 145-160.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT. The SF-36 health survey questionnaire: An outcome measure suitable for routine used within the NHS? Br Med J 1993; 306: 1440-1444.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, et al. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries: Results from the IQOLA project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1149-1158.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Chang DF, Chun CA, Takeuchi DT, Shen H. SF-36 Health Survey. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability in a community sample of Chinese Americans. Med Care 2000; 38: 542-548.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Keller SD, Ware JE, Bentler PM, et al. Use of structural equation modeling to test the construct validity of the SF-36 health survey in ten countries: Results from the IQOLA project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1179-1188.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Mook J, Kleijn WC, van-de-ploeg HM. Symptom positively and negatively worded items in two popular self report inventories of anxiety and depression. Psychological reports 1991; 69: 551-560.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rummel RJ. Applied Factor Analysis. Chicago: Northwest University Press. 1970; 369.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ware JE, Gandek B, Kosinski M, et al. The equivalence of SF-36 summary health scores estimated using standard and country-specific algorithms in 10 countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1167-1170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fukuhara S, Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Wada S, Gandek B. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity of the Japanese SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1045-1153.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson PA, Goldman L, Orav EJ, Garcia T, Pearson SD, Lee TH. Comparison of the Medical Outcomes Study short-form 36-item health survey in black patients and white patients with acute chest pain. Med Care 1995; 33: 145-160.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Corporate Author. Singapore in Figures, 1998. Singapore: Department of Statistics, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore

    J. Thumboo, K. -H. Leong, P. -H. Feng, S. -T. Thio & M. -L. Boey

  2. Department of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

    K. -Y. Fong

  3. Clinical Trials and Epidemiology Research Unit, Ministry of Health, Singapore

    D. Machin

  4. Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore

    S. -P. Chan

Authors
  1. J. Thumboo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. -Y. Fong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Machin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. -P. Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. K. -H. Leong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. P. -H. Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. S. -T. Thio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M. -L. Boey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thumboo, J., Fong, K.Y., Machin, D. et al. A community-based study of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 in Singapore. Qual Life Res 10, 175–188 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016701514299

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016701514299

Search

Navigation