» Articles » PMID: 25311305

Measuring Quality of Life with Fuzzy Numbers: in the Perspectives of Reliability, Validity, Measurement Invariance, and Feasibility

Overview
Journal Qual Life Res
Date 2014 Oct 15
PMID 25311305
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Fuzzy set theory (FST) can improve various aspects of measurement with questionnaires. However, very little is known about how to use FST to measure quality of life (QOL). The main purpose of our study was to find an appropriate fuzzy measure for QOL that, while demonstrating the advantages of FST, can also be compared with mainstream QOL measures, most of which use traditional Likert-type scales.

Methods: Referring to the literature on fuzzy scoring methods, we first revised the measurement scale and scoring method of the traditional WHOQOL-BREF (i.e., a five-point Likert-type scale) to create three versions of a fuzzy WHOQOL-BREF. Then, we examined the psychometric relationships of these three fuzzy measures and the traditional WHOQOL-BREF in a within-subject design.

Results: Our results show that a fuzzy-scales weighted-by-membership (FSWM) version of the WHOQOL-BREF is comparable to the traditional WHOQOL-BREF in that it accepts strong invariance and shows almost perfect agreement. It also demonstrates higher reliability and face validity than the traditional WHOQOL-BREF.

Conclusion: We recommend that future studies examine the use of FSWM to measure QOL.

Citing Articles

Mining latent information in PTSD psychometrics with fuzziness for effective diagnoses.

Li Y, Xiong X, Qiu C, Wang Q, Xu J Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):16266.

PMID: 30389985 PMC: 6214927. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34573-7.

References
1.
Schneider S . In search of realistic optimism. Meaning, knowledge, and warm fuzziness. Am Psychol. 2001; 56(3):250-63. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.56.3.250. View

2.
Schwartz C, Rapkin B . Reconsidering the psychometrics of quality of life assessment in light of response shift and appraisal. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004; 2:16. PMC: 408465. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-2-16. View

3.
OLeary T, Diller L, Recklitis C . The effects of response bias on self-reported quality of life among childhood cancer survivors. Qual Life Res. 2007; 16(7):1211-20. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9231-3. View

4.
Hollen P, Gralla R, Kris M, McCoy S, Donaldson G, Moinpour C . A comparison of visual analogue and numerical rating scale formats for the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS): does format affect patient ratings of symptoms and quality of life?. Qual Life Res. 2005; 14(3):837-47. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-004-0833-8. View

5.
Matt G, Turingan M, Dinh Q, Felsch J, Hovell M, Gehrman C . Improving self-reports of drug-use: numeric estimates as fuzzy sets. Addiction. 2003; 98(9):1239-47. DOI: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00444.x. View