Why the study?
The psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Minnesota Life with Heart Failure Questionnaire needed investigation to assess quality of life in Iranian heart failure patients.
The Persian version of the MLHF-Q is a valid and highly reliable instrument for assessing quality of life in Iranian heart failure patients.
May enable QoL assessment in Persian-speaking HF patients; leaves open need for larger studies before routine adoption.
Background and Aims: The Minnesota Life with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF-Q), a globally recognized instrument, is widely used to assess the quality of life in heart failure (HF) patients. This study, conducted in Iran, investigated the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the MLHF-Q and contributed to the global understanding of the quality of life assessment of HF patients. Methods: In this methodological study, the MLHF-Q was meticulously translated from English to Persian using a rigorous forward-backward translation process. Subsequently, the Persian version was comprehensively assessed for content and face validity, structural validity (through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis), reliability, and stability. Results: Five hundred twenty-seven heart failure patients participated in the study, with a mean age of 57.9 years (SD = 13.54). Exploratory factor analysis validated a three-factor structure for the scale, and confirmatory factor analysis showed satisfactory model fit indices (RMSEA = 0.08, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, IFI = 0.93). The questionnaire had exceptional internal consistency and reliability, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.97 and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.98, instilling confidence in our results' robustness. Conclusion: The questionnaire used to measure the quality of life of heart patients is very accurate and reliable. It can evaluate the quality of life of these patients in three main sections (researchers, doctors, and patients).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heravi‐Karimooi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: