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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2005

Open Access 01-12-2005 | Research

Injection Drug Use Quality of Life scale (IDUQOL): A validation study

Authors: Anita M Hubley, Lara B Russell, Anita Palepu

Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes | Issue 1/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Existing measures of injection drug users' quality of life have focused primarily on health and health-related factors. Clearly, however, quality of life among injection drug users is impacted by a range of unique cultural, socioeconomic, medical, and geographic factors that must also be considered in any measure. The Injection Drug User Quality of Life (IDUQOL) scale was designed to capture the unique and individual circumstances that determine quality of life among injection drug users. The overall purpose of the present study was to examine the validity of inferences made from the IDUQOL by examining the (a) dimensionality, (b) reliability of scores, (c) criterion-related validity evidence, and (d) both convergent and discriminant validity evidence.

Methods

An exploratory factor analysis using principal axis factoring in SPSS 12.0 was conducted to determine whether the use of a total score on the IDUQOL was advisable. Reliability of scores from the IDUQOL was obtained using internal consistency and one-week test-retest reliability estimates. Criterion-related validity evidence was gathered using variables such as stability of housing, sex trade involvement, high-risk injection behaviours, involvement in treatment programs, emergency treatment or overdose over the previous six months, hospitalization and emergency treatment over the subsequent six month period post data collection. Convergent and discriminant validity evidence was gathered using measures of life satisfaction, self-esteem, and social desirability.

Results

The sample consisted of 241 injection drug users ranging in age from 19 to 61 years. Factor analysis supports the use of a total score. Both internal consistency (alpha = .88) and one-week test-retest reliability (r = .78) for IDUQOL total scores were good. Criterion-related, convergent, and discriminant validity evidence supports the interpretation of IDUQOL total scores as measuring a construct consistent with quality of life.

Conclusion

The findings from this study provide initial evidence to support the use of the IDUQOL total score. The results of the study also suggest the IDUQOL could be further strengthened with additional attention to how some IDUQOL domains are described and satisfaction is measured.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Darke S, Hall W, Wodak A, Heather N, Ward J: Development and validation of a multidimensional instrument for assessing outcome of treatment among opiate users: Opiate Treatment Index. British Journal of Addiction 1992, 87: 733–742.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Torrens M, San L, Martinez A, Castillo C, Domingo-Salvany A, Alonso J: Use of the Nottingham Health Profile for measuring health status of patients in methadone maintenance treatment. Addiction 1997, 92: 707–716. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1997.9267077.xPubMedCrossRef
3.
Puigdollers E, Domingo-Salvany A, Brugal MT, Torrens M, Alvaros J, Castillo C, Magri N, Martin S, Vazquez JM: Characteristics of heroin addicts entering methadone maintenance treatment: Quality of life and gender. Substance Use & Misuse 2004, 39: 1353–1368. 10.1081/JA-120039392CrossRef
4.
Ryan CF, White JM: Health status at entry to methadone maintenance treatment using the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Addiction 1996, 91: 39–45. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1996.911397.xPubMedCrossRef
5.
Stein MD, Mulvey KP, Plough A, Samet JH: The functioning and well being of persons who seek treatment for drug and alcohol use. Journal of Substance Abuse 1998, 10: 75–84. 10.1016/S0899-3289(99)80142-4PubMedCrossRef
6.
Carretero MD, Burgess AP, Soler P, Soler M, Catalan J: Reliability and validity of an HIV-specific health-related quality-of-life measure for use with injecting drug users. AIDS 1996, 10: 1699–1705.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Dalgard O, Egeland A, Skaug K, Vilimas K, Steen T: Health-related quality of life in active injecting drug users with and without chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Hepatology 2004, 39: 74–80. 10.1002/hep.20014PubMedCrossRef
8.
Falck RS, Wang J, Carlson RG, Siegal HA: Crack-cocaine use and mental health status as defined by the SF-36. Addictive Behaviors 2000, 25: 579–584. 10.1016/S0306-4603(99)00040-4PubMedCrossRef
9.
Smith KW, Avis NE, Assmann SF: Distinguishing between quality of life and health status in quality of life research: A meta-analysis. Quality of Life Research 1999, 8: 447–459. 10.1023/A:1008928518577PubMedCrossRef
10.
Metzger DS, O'Brien CP: Substance Abuse: The Challenge of Assessment. In Quality of Life Assessments in Clinical Trials. Edited by: Spilker B. New York, Raven Press, Ltd.; 1990:237–246.
11.
Koch T: Life quality vs the 'quality of life': Assumptions and underlying prospective quality of life instruments in health care planning. Social Science and Medicine 2000, 51: 419–427. 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00474-8PubMedCrossRef
12.
Globe DR, Hays RD, Cunningham WE: Associations of clinical parameters with health-related quality of life in hospitalized persons with HIV disease. AIDS Care 1999, 17: 71–86. 10.1080/09540129948216CrossRef
13.
Brogly S, Mercier C, Bruneau J, Palepu A, Franco E: Towards more effective public health programming for injection drug users: Development and evaluation of the Injection Drug User Quality of Life Scale. Substance Use & Misuse 2003, 38: 965–992. 10.1081/JA-120017619CrossRef
14.
APA, AERA, NCME: Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC, American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, National Council on Measurement in Education; 1985.
15.
Hubley AM, Zumbo BD: A dialectic on validity: Where we have been and where we are going. J Gen Psychol 1996, 123: 207–215.CrossRef
16.
Messick S: Validity of test interpretation and use. Research Report No. 90–11. Educational Testing Service; 1990.
17.
Strathdee SA, Patrick DM, Currie SL, Cornelisse PG, Rekart ML, Montaner JS, Schechter MT, O'Shaughnessy MV: Needle exchange is not enough: lessons from the Vancouver injecting drug use study. AIDS 1997, 11: F59–65. 10.1097/00002030-199708000-00001PubMedCrossRef
18.
Russell LB, Hubley AM: Importance ratings and weightings: Old concerns and new perspectives. International Journal of Testing 2005, 5: 105–131. 10.1207/s15327574ijt0502_2CrossRef
19.
Russell LB, Hubley AM, Palepu A, Zumbo BD: Does weighting capture what's important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Social Indicators Research in press
20.
Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S: The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment 1985, 49: 71–74.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Rosenberg M: Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press; 1965.
22.
Strahan R, Gerbasi KC: Short, homonegeous versions of the Marlow-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology 1972, 28: 191–193.CrossRef
23.
Crowne DP, Marlowe D: A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology 1960, 24: 349–354.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Campbell DT: Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait and discriminant validity. American Psychologist 1960, 15: 546–553.CrossRef
25.
Foster SL, Cone JD: Validity issues in clinical assessment. Psychological Assessment 1995, 7: 248–260. 10.1037//1040-3590.7.3.248CrossRef
26.
Nandakumar R, Ackerman T: Test modeling. In The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for the Social Sciences. Edited by: Kaplan D. Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE Publications; 2004:93–105.
27.
Pedhazur EJ, Schmelkin LP: Measurement and scientific inquiry. In Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. Pub.; 1991.
28.
Stout W: A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika 1987, 52: 589–617.CrossRef
29.
Stout WF: A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika 1990, 55: 293–325.CrossRef
30.
Gorsuch RL: Factor analysis. 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum; 1983.
31.
Pett MA, Lackey NR, Sullivan JJ: Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE Publications; 2003.
32.
Hattie J: Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement 1984, 20: 1–14.CrossRef
33.
Hattie J: An empirical study of the various indices for determining unidimensionality. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1985, 19: 49–78.CrossRef
34.
Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ: Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods 1999, 4: 272–299. 10.1037//1082-989X.4.3.272CrossRef
35.
Russell DW: In search of underlying dimensions: The use (and abuse) of factor analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2002, 28: 1629–1646. 10.1177/014616702237645CrossRef
36.
Clark LA, Watson D: Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment 1995, 7: 309–319. 10.1037//1040-3590.7.3.309CrossRef
37.
38.
Netemeyer RG, Bearden WO, Sharma S: Scaling procedures: issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE Press; 2003.
Metadata
Title
Injection Drug Use Quality of Life scale (IDUQOL): A validation study
Authors
Anita M Hubley
Lara B Russell
Anita Palepu
Publication date
01-12-2005
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes / Issue 1/2005
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7525
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-3-43

Other articles of this Issue 1/2005

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2005 Go to the issue

Review

Patient-focused measures of functional health status and health-related quality of life in pediatric orthopedics: A case study in measurement selection

Review

Assessing sensitivity to change: choosing the appropriate change coefficient

Research

Engagement of patients in religious and spiritual practices: Confirmatory results with the SpREUK-P 1.1 questionnaire as a tool of quality of life research

Research

Internal consistency reliability is a poor predictor of responsiveness

Research

Health-state valuations for pertussis: methods for valuing short-term health states

Research

Cross-cultural validation and analysis of responsiveness of the QUALIOST®: QUAlity of Life questionnaire In OSTeoporosis