Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: Current recommendations for visual analogue scale (VAS) design are largely derived from studies on pain assessment. We evaluated respondent preferences for VAS design for health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted among Chinese-speaking rheumatology outpatients and caregivers (age > or = 21 years) to determine preferences for the following: (1) VAS orientation (horizontal/vertical); (2) length of instructions (long/intermediate/short); (3) scale range (0-10/0-100 points); (4) indicator for computerized touchscreen VAS (bar/column). Responses in subjects expressing a preference were compared using tests of proportions. RESULTS: Among 101 subjects, more subjects preferred a horizontal over a vertical format (48 vs. 37, P = 0.23; 16 no preference), and intermediate length over long/short instructions (44 vs. 14 vs. 31, P = 0.004; 12 no preference). A scale range of 0-10 was preferred over 0-100 (62 vs. 21, P < 0.001; 18 no preference). A bar indicator was preferred over a column for computerized touchscreen VAS (54 vs. 44, P = 0.31; 3 no preference). Only presence of chronic medical conditions influenced subject preference [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 3.9 (1.6-9.6), P = 0.002]. CONCLUSION: Chinese-speaking subjects preferred a 0-10-point VAS with intermediate length instructions for HRQoL assessment. Thus, a 0-10-point VAS with intermediate length instructions may be more useful for HRQoL assessment among Chinese subjects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wee et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: