We have located links that may give you full text access.
Validation of the ECOS-16 Questionnaire in Koreans with Osteoporosis.
Asian Spine Journal 2016 October
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of the adapted Korean version of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (ECOS-16).
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The validity of the Korean version of ECOS-16 has not been completely demonstrated.
METHODS: Translation/retranslation of the English version of ECOS-16, and full cross-cultural adaptation were performed. The Korean version of a visual analog scale measure of pain, and the Korean versions of ECOS-16 and of the previously validated short form-36 (SF-36) were mailed to 158 consecutive patients with osteoporosis. Factor analysis and reliability assessment using kappa statistics of agreement for each item, intraclass correlation coefficient, and Cronbach's α were done. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing responses to ECOS-16 with responses to SF-36 using Pearson's correlation coefficient.
RESULTS: Factor analysis extracted three factors. All items had a kappa statistics of agreement >0.6. The ECOS-16 showed good test/re-test reliability (0.8469) and internal consistency of Cronbach's α (0.897). The Korean version of ECOS-16 showed significant correlation with SF-36 total scores and with single SF-36 domains scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The adapted Korean version of the ECOS-16 was successfully translated and showed acceptable measurement properties. It is considered suitable for outcome assessments in Korean patients with osteoporosis.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of the adapted Korean version of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (ECOS-16).
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The validity of the Korean version of ECOS-16 has not been completely demonstrated.
METHODS: Translation/retranslation of the English version of ECOS-16, and full cross-cultural adaptation were performed. The Korean version of a visual analog scale measure of pain, and the Korean versions of ECOS-16 and of the previously validated short form-36 (SF-36) were mailed to 158 consecutive patients with osteoporosis. Factor analysis and reliability assessment using kappa statistics of agreement for each item, intraclass correlation coefficient, and Cronbach's α were done. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing responses to ECOS-16 with responses to SF-36 using Pearson's correlation coefficient.
RESULTS: Factor analysis extracted three factors. All items had a kappa statistics of agreement >0.6. The ECOS-16 showed good test/re-test reliability (0.8469) and internal consistency of Cronbach's α (0.897). The Korean version of ECOS-16 showed significant correlation with SF-36 total scores and with single SF-36 domains scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The adapted Korean version of the ECOS-16 was successfully translated and showed acceptable measurement properties. It is considered suitable for outcome assessments in Korean patients with osteoporosis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults.Gut 2024 April 17
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 May
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2024.Endoscopy 2024 April 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app