AQoL-8D

AQoL-8D questionnaire

Scoring the AQol-8D

Diagram of the AQoL-8D structure

AQoL-8D reliability

 

Reference papers:

Maxwell, A, Özmen, M, Iezzi, A, & Richardson, JR (2016). Deriving population norms for the AQoL-6D and AQoL-8D multi attribute utility instruments from web-based data. Quality of Life Research. DOI 10.1007/s11136-016-1337-z

Richardson, JR, Iezzi, A, Khan, MA, & Maxwell, A. (2014). Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument. The Patient - Patient Centered Outcomes Research, vol 7, pp 85-96. DOI 10.1007/s40271-013-0036-x

 

Construction of Descriptive System

  • 61 - Richardson, J, Elsworth, G, Iezzi, A, Khan, MA, Mihalopoulos, C, Schweitzer, I, Herrman, H. (2011). Increasing the sensitivity of the AQoL inventory for the evaluation of interventions affecting mental health. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.
  • 40 - Richardson J,  Iezzi A, Khan MA, Sinha K, Mihalopoulos C, Herrman H, Hawthorne G, Schweitzer I. (2009). Data used in the development of the AQoL-8D (PsyQoL) Quality of Life Instrument, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.
  • 39 - Richardson J, Khan MA, Iezzi A, Sinha K, Mihalopoulos C, Herrman H, Hawthorne G, Schweitzer I. (2009). The AQoL-8D (PsyQoL) MAU Instrument: Overview September 2009. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.


Construction of Utility Weights

  • Richardson J., Sinha K., Iezzi A., & Khan M.A. (2014). Modelling utility weights for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D. Quality of Life Research, vol 23, pp2395-2404. DOI:10.1007/s11136-014-0686-8. [An earlier draft of this paper can be accessed here.]
  • 40 - Richardson J, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Sinha K, Mihalopoulos C, Herrman H, Hawthorne G, Schweitzer I. (2009). Data used in the development of the AQoL-8D (PsyQoL) Quality of Life Instrument, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.


 Validity and Reliability

  • Richardson J, Khan MA, Iezzi A, Maxwell A. (2015). Measuring the sensitivity and construct validity of 6 utility instruments in 7 disease areas. Medical Decision Making, e-copy ahead of print  DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15613522.
  • Richardson J, Chen G, Khan MA, Iezzi A. (2015). Can multi attribute utility instruments adequately account for subjective well-being? Medical Decision Making, vol 35, no 3 pp 292-304.
  • Richardson J, Khan MA, Iezzi A, Maxwell A. (2014). Comparing and explaining differences in the content, sensitivity and magnitude of incremental utilities predicted by the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI 3, 15D, QWB and AQoL-8D multi attribute utility instruments. Medical Decision Making (accepted 15 June 2014) DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14543107.
  • Richardson J, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Maxwell A. (2014). Validity and reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL-8D) multi attribute utility instrument. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, vol 7, pp 85-96 (DOI 10.1007/s40271-013-0036-x).
  • 63 - Richardson J, Sinha K, Iezzi A, Khan MA. (2011). Modelling the Utility of Health States with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D Instrument: Overview and Utility Scoring Algorithm. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.
  • 47 - Richardson J, Khan MA, Iezzi A. (2010). Preliminary results for the validation of the Assessment of Quality of Life AQoL-8D instrument, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.
  • Richardson J. 2010. Psychometric Validity and Multi Attribute Utility (MAU) Instruments, Research Paper 57, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.
  • Test-retest reliabilty coefficients - page 38 in Richardson J, Chen, G, Iezzi, A & Khan, MA. (2011). Transformations between the Assessment of Quality of Life AQoL Instruments and Test-Retest Reliability. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.


Transformations

  • 66 - Richardson J, Chen, G, Iezzi, A & Khan, MA. (2011). Transformations between the Assessment of Quality of Life AQoL Instruments and Test-Retest Reliability. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.


Norms

 

Conceptualisation: WHO concept of Handicap

Timing:

AQoL- 8D takes about 5 minutes to complete

 Description:

  • 8 separately scored dimensions, consisting of AQoL-6D and 2 additional dimensions, totalling 35 items
  • Items were developed from other mental health scales and focus groups
  • A simple global ‘utility’ score


Dimensions from AQoL-6D

  • Independent Living - household tasks, mobility outside the home, walking and self-care;
  • Relationships - friendships, family role and community role;
  • Mental Health - feelings of despair, worry, sadness, tranquility/agitation;
  • Coping - having enough energy, being in control and coping with problems;
  • Pain - the frequency of pain, the degree of pain and the interference with usual activities caused by pain;
  • Senses - seeing, hearing and communication.

 


New 8D Dimensions and/or New Items added to the 6D Dimensions

  • Relationships - enjoying relationships with family and friends, satisfaction with close relationships with family and friends, social isolation and social exclusion;
  • Mental Health - feelings of depression, trouble sleeping, feelings of anger, self-harm;
  • Self-Worth - feeling like a burden, worthlessness and confidence;
  • Happiness - contentment, enthusiam, degree of feeling happiness and pleasure.

 

Super-dimension components

  • Physical - independent living, senses, pain
  • Psychosocial - mental health, relationships, coping, self-worth, happiness

 

Construction 

Descriptive System:

  • Exploratory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modelling of item responses from a representative sample of members of the public (n=200) and mental health patients at various Melbourne mental health centres (n=470)

 

Scaling System:

  • TTO scores were obtained from 300 patients and 300 members of the public
  • Multiplicative stage 1 dimension models were constructed
  • Econometric “correctional” stage 2 dimension models were constructed
  • A multiplicative global model combined the 8 dimensions
  • An econometric ‘corrected’ stage 2 model was constructed