Key result
The SF-36 questionnaire demonstrated higher reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.825) compared to the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha 0.701) for assessing quality of life in CAD patients.
Why the study?
Is the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire as reliable as the SF-36 questionnaire for assessing quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease?
RCT (n=543)
Randomly divided
No
Is the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire as reliable as the SF-36 questionnaire for assessing quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.825% vs 0.701%
The SF-36 questionnaire demonstrates higher reliability than the WHOQOL-BREF for evaluating quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
SF-36 may be preferred for QoL assessment in CAD; cross-sectional data leaves open need for longitudinal validation.
Najafi et al. (2009) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease (n=543). Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire vs. World Health Organization's Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) was evaluated on Reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient). The SF-36 questionnaire demonstrated higher reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.825) compared to the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha 0.701) for assessing quality of life in CAD patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: