Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Quality of Life Research
Published in: Quality of Life Research 4/2007

Open Access 01-05-2007 | Original paper

Feasibility, reliability, and validity of adolescent health status measurement by the Child Health Questionnaire Child Form (CHQ-CF): internet administration compared with the standard paper version

Authors: Hein Raat, Resiti T. Mangunkusumo, Jeanne M. Landgraf, Gitte Kloek, Johannes Brug

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 4/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Aims

In this study we evaluated indicators of the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Child Health Questionnaire-Child Form (CHQ-CF). We compared the results in a subgroup of adolescents who completed the standard paper version of the CHQ-CF with the results in another subgroup of adolescents who completed an internet version, i.e., an online, web-based CHQ-CF questionnaire.

Methods

Under supervision at school, 1,071 adolescents were randomized to complete the CHQ-CF and items on chronic conditions by a paper questionnaire or by an internet administered questionnaire.

Results

The participation rate was 87%; age range 13–7 years. The internet administration resulted in fewer missing answers. All but one multi-item scale showed internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α > 0.70). All scales clearly discriminated between adolescents with no, a few, or many self-reported chronic conditions. The paper administration resulted in statistically significant, higher scores on 4 of 10 CHQ-CF scales compared with the internet administration (P < 0.05), but Cohen’s effect sizes d were ≤0.21. Mode of administration interacted significantly with age (P < 0.05) on four CHQ-CF scales, but Cohen’s effect sizes for these differences were also ≤0.21.

Conclusion

This study supports the feasibility, internal consistency reliability of the scales, and construct validity of the CHQ-CF administered by either a paper questionnaire or online questionnaire. Given Cohen’s suggested guidelines for the interpretation of effect sizes, i.e., 0.20–.50 indicates a small effect, differences in CHQ-CF scale scores between paper and internet administration can be considered as negligible or small.
Literature
1.
Connolly, M. A., & Johnson, J. A. (1999). Measuring quality of life in paediatric patients. Pharmacoeconomics, 16(6):605–25.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Raat, H., Mohangoo, A. D., & Grootenhuis, M. A. (2006). Pediatric health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials. Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 6(3):180–85.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Landgraf, J. M., Abetz, L.,& Ware, J. E. (1996). The CHQ user’s manual. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
4.
Landgraf, J. M., & Abetz, L. N. (1997). Functional status and well-being of children representing three cultural groups: Initial self-reports using the CHQ-CF87. Psychology and Health, 12:839–54.CrossRef
5.
Ruperto N., Ravelli A., Pistorio A., Malattia C., Cavuto S., Gado-West L. & et al. (2001). Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) and the Child Health Questionnaire in 32 countries. Review of the general methodology.Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 19(4(supplement 23)):S1–S9.PubMed
6.
Waters, E. B., Salmon, L. A., Wake, M., Wright, M., & Hesketh, K. D. (2001). The health and well-being of adolescents: A school-based population study of the self-report Child Health Questionnaire. Journal of Adolescent Health, 29(2):140–49.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Raat, H., Landgraf, J. M., Bonsel, G. J., Gemke, R. J., & Essink-Bot, M. L. (2002). Reliability and validity of the child health questionnaire-child form (CHQ-CF87) in a Dutch adolescent population.Quality of Life Research, 11(6):575–81.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Schonlau, M. (2004). Will web surveys ever become part of mainstream research? Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(3):e31.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Bloom, D. E. (1998). Technology, experimentation, and the quality of survey data. Science, 280(5365):847–48.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Bayliss, M. S., Dewey, J. E., Dunlap, I., Batenhorst A. S., Cady, R., Diamond, M. L. & et al. (2003). A study of the feasibility of Internet administration of a computerized health survey: The headache impact test (HIT). Quality of Life Research, 12(8):953–61.CrossRefPubMed
11.
O’Toole, B. I., Battistutta, D., Long, A., & Crouch, K. (1986). A comparison of costs and data quality of three health survey methods: Mail, telephone and personal home interview.American Journal of Epidemiology, 124(2):317–28.PubMed
12.
McHorney, C. A., Kosinski, M.,& Ware, J. E. Jr. (1994). Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: Results from a national survey. Medical Care, 32(6):551–67.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Brewer, N. T., Hallman, W. K., Fiedler, N., & Kipen H. M. (2004). Why do people report better health by phone than by mail? Medical Care, 42(9):875–83.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health (Oxford, England), 27(3):281–91.CrossRef
15.
Kleinman, L., Leidy, N. K., Crawley, J., Bonomi, A., & Schoenfeld P. (2001). A comparative trial of paper-and-pencil versus computer administration of the Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) questionnaire. Medical Care, 39(2):181–89.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ryan, J. M., Corry, J. R., Attewell, R., & Smithson, M. J. (2002). A comparison of an electronic version of the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire to the standard paper version. Quality of Life Research, 11(1):19–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Litaker, D. (2003). New technology in quality of life research: Are all computer-assisted approaches created equal? Quality of Life Research, 12(4):387–93.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Turner, C. F., Ku, L., Rogers, S. M., Lindberg, L. D., Pleck, J. H., & Sonenstein, F. L. (1998). Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: Increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science, 280(5365):867–73.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Webb, P. M., Zimet, G. D., Fortenberry, J. D., & Blythe, M. J. (1999). Comparability of a computer-assisted versus written method for collecting health behavior information from adolescent patients. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24(6):383–88.CrossRefPubMed
20.
MacMillan, H. L. (1999). Computer survey technology: A window on sensitive issues. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(9):1142.PubMed
21.
Pealer, L. N., Weiler, R. M., Pigg, R. M. Jr., Miller, D., & Dorman, S. M. (2001). The feasibility of a web-based surveillance system to collect health risk behavior data from college students. Health Education & Behavior, 28(5):547–59.CrossRef
22.
Balter, K. A., Balter, O., Fondell, E., & Lagerros, Y. T. (2005). Web-based and mailed questionnaires: A comparison of response rates and compliance. Epidemiology, 16(4):577–79.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Ritter, P., Lorig, K., Laurent, D., & Matthews, K. (2004). Internet versus mailed questionnaires: A randomized comparison. Journal of Medical and Internet Research, 6(3):e29.CrossRef
24.
Mangunkusumo, R. T., Moorman, P. W., van den Berg-de Ruiter, A. E., van der Lei, J., de Koning H. J., & Raat, H. (2005). Internet-administered adolescent health questionnaires compared with a paper version in a randomized study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36(1):70.e1–.CrossRef
25.
Mangunkusumo, R. T., Duisterhout, J. S., de Graaff, N., Maarsingh, E. J., de Koning, H. J., & Raat, H. (2006). Internet versus paper mode of health and health behavior questionnaires in elementary schools: Asthma and fruit as examples. The Journal of School Health, 76(2):80–6.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Raat, H., Mangunkusumo, R. T., Mohangoo A. D., Juniper E. F., & Van Der Lei J. (2007). Internet and written respiratory questionnaires yield equivalent results for adolescents. Pediatric Pulmonology, In press.
27.
Gosselin, D. (2005) PHP Programming with MySQL. Course Technology, (1st ed.).
28.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, Academic Press
29.
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41(5):582–92.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Cronbach’s alpha. British Medical Journal, 314(7080):572.PubMed
31.
Feldt, L. S., & Kim, S. (2006). Testing the difference between two alpha coefficients with small samples of subjects and raters. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4):589–00.CrossRef
32.
Corey, D. M., Dunlap, W. P., & Burke, M. J. (1998). Averaging correlations: Expected values and bias in combined Pearson rs and Fisher’s z transformations. The Journal of General Psychology, 125(3):245–61.CrossRef
33.
Hays, H.L. (1994). Statistics. (5th ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
34.
Statistics Netherlands - Statline. In. Heerlen, The Netherlands; 2005.
35.
Garcia, R., Benet, M., Arnau, C., & Cobo, E. (2004). Efficiency of the cross-over design: An empirical estimation. Statistics in Medicine, 23(24):3773–780.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Wit, E., & McClure, J. (2004). Statistics for microarrays; design, analysis and inference. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Metadata
Title
Feasibility, reliability, and validity of adolescent health status measurement by the Child Health Questionnaire Child Form (CHQ-CF): internet administration compared with the standard paper version
Authors
Hein Raat
Resiti T. Mangunkusumo
Jeanne M. Landgraf
Gitte Kloek
Johannes Brug
Publication date
01-05-2007
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 4/2007
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-9157-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2007

Quality of Life Research 4/2007 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Twelve years–experience with the Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life: a graded structured review

Review Paper

Documenting the rationale and psychometric characteristics of patient reported outcomes for labeling and promotional claims: the PRO Evidence Dossier

Brief Communication

Quality of life findings from a multicenter, multinational, observational study of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Original Paper

Burden of restless legs syndrome on health-related quality of life

Research Article

Psychological acceptance and quality of life in the elderly

Original Paper

The role of coping strategies in quality of life of adolescents with asthma