Table 1.

Research questions (Q) and hypotheses (H) to provide evidence on validity and reliability of the SEIQoL-DW

Lines of validity, reliability and responsiveness
Evidence based on test content
Q1: Does the SEIQoL-DW measure quality of life, given the new conceptualization?
Q2: In how many patients are the responses on the SEIQoL-DW invalid?
Q3: What is the percentage of positive and negative domains nominated by the patients?
Evidence based on internal structure
H1: There is a low to moderate correlation between the scores of the actual status and the relative importance.
Evidence based on relations with other variables
H2: There is a high correlation between the scores of the actual status in patients who reported health as important and the linear analog scale of health status.
H3: There is a lower score in the actual status of financial means and material well-being in patients who are unemployed or looking for work than in others.
H4: There is a lower score in the actual status of job/education in patients who are unemployed or looking for work than in others.
H5: There is a lower score in the actual status of health in patients who are not able to work due to disabilities.
H6: There is a low to moderate correlation between the SEIQoL-DW index score and the linear analog scale of quality of life.
Evidence on reliability
H7: The SEIQoL-DW index score remains stable in patients in whom no medical or psychosocial changes occur during an interval of one year.
Evidence on responsiveness
H8: Changes in the scores of the actual status in patients who reported health as important are highly correlated with changes on the linear analog scale of health status.
H9: Changes in health status are not or marginally correlated with changes in SEIQoL-DW index score.
Q4: What is the percentage of patients with the lowest (0 = floor) and highest possible score (100 = ceiling) on the SEIQoL-DW index?