Detailled Information

Name of the Instrument/Tool Assessment of Health Related Quality of Life in Osteoporosis (ECOS-16)
First Description
Badia X, Prieto L, Roset M, Díez-Pérez A. Development of the ECOS-16 clinical questionnaire for the assessment of the quality of life in patients with osteoporosis. Medicina clinica. 2000;114:68-75.
Year 2000
Domains
Concept of constructs Health related quality of life
Population/Disease Disease specific
Originally developed for Osteoporosis (OP)
Other rheumatic diseases
where can be applied (only if validated)
---
Additional population with no rheumatic diseases No
Language: Originally published in Spanish
Available in Language Arabic, Turkish, Spanish, English, Italian
REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION
Author/s Badia X, Prieto L, Roset M, Díez-Pérez A.2000;114:68-75.
Title Development of the ECOS-16 clinical questionnaire for the assessment of the quality of life in patients with osteoporosis.
Journal Medicina clinica.
Year 2000
Vol 114
Num ---
Pages 68-75
Country Spain
Language English
Other references of interest
No other References.
Instrument/Tool Translations References
Link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17631735
Brief Description

Italian version

DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION
Correspondence to ---
E-Mail ---
Address ---
Website ---
Available ---
Links ---
DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
Type Of Measure Questionnaire
Brief Description

Evaluation of health related quality of life in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. It is based on the combination of two disease-specific HRQoL questionnaires for women with osteoporosis: the Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ) and the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). The questionnaire consists of 12 items from the QUALEFFO and 4 from the OQLQ.

Number of Items 16
Range from 1 to 5
Responses options/scale Yes
5 response options for each item
Developed for Both
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Method of administration Self-administered
Recommendations to score

Scores each item from 1 to 5; total score ranges from 1 to 5.

Score Interpretation Higher score (5) reflects worse health quality of life
Cut-off points ---
Cut-off points applied to ---
Smallest detectable change if described ---
Smallest detectable change applied to ---
Completion time by the patient 12 minutes
Scoring time by the assessor 0 minutes
Training to score Not necessary
Strengths Easy to use
Limitations Floor effect
OTHER COMMENTS
Other Comments ---