The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A within-subjects trial to test the equivalence of online and paper outcome measures: The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire

A within-subjects trial to test the equivalence of online and paper outcome measures: The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire
A within-subjects trial to test the equivalence of online and paper outcome measures: The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire
Background: augmenting validated paper versions of existing outcome measures with an equivalent online version may offer substantial research advantages (cost, rapidity and reliability). However, equivalence of online and paper questionnaires cannot be assumed, nor can acceptability to respondents. The aim was to test whether online and written versions of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), a standard measure of functional disability in back pain, are equivalent at both group and individual levels to establish whether they can be used interchangeably.

Methods: this is a within-participants equivalence study. 167 participants with back pain fully completed both the paper and online versions of the RMDQ in random order. Participants were recruited from a chiropractic clinic and patient support groups in Southern England. Limits of equivalence were pre-defined as 0.5 RMDQ points, the Bland-Altman range was calculated, and participants' comments were examined using content analysis.

Results: the mean score difference was 0.03 (SD = 1.43), with the 95% Confidence Interval falling entirely within our limits of equivalence (-0.19 to 0.25). The Bland-Altman range was -2.77 to 2.83 RMDQ points. Participants identified unique advantages and disadvantages associated with each version of the RMDQ.

Conclusions: the group and individual level data suggest that online and paper versions of the RMDQ are equivalent and can be used interchangeably. The Bland-Altman range appears to reflect the known measurement properties of the RMDQ. Furthermore, participants' comments confirmed the potential value to be had from offering them the choice of completing the RMDQ online or on paper
113-[7pp]
Bishop, Felicity L.
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928
Lewis, Graham
0e6c7e12-9189-4a0f-a7b6-a803fd152f0a
Harris, Scott
19ea097b-df15-4f0f-be19-8ac42c190028
McKay, Naomi
6f8e1cce-498d-456b-b40f-5bd4ae1b7eef
Prentice, Philippa
5265386a-c79a-4577-8d3a-4076ead0cb27
Thiel, Haymo
54221254-4c23-4d5f-8c05-eb7c70d3beea
Lewith, George T.
0fc483fa-f17b-47c5-94d9-5c15e65a7625
Bishop, Felicity L.
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928
Lewis, Graham
0e6c7e12-9189-4a0f-a7b6-a803fd152f0a
Harris, Scott
19ea097b-df15-4f0f-be19-8ac42c190028
McKay, Naomi
6f8e1cce-498d-456b-b40f-5bd4ae1b7eef
Prentice, Philippa
5265386a-c79a-4577-8d3a-4076ead0cb27
Thiel, Haymo
54221254-4c23-4d5f-8c05-eb7c70d3beea
Lewith, George T.
0fc483fa-f17b-47c5-94d9-5c15e65a7625

Bishop, Felicity L., Lewis, Graham, Harris, Scott, McKay, Naomi, Prentice, Philippa, Thiel, Haymo and Lewith, George T. (2010) A within-subjects trial to test the equivalence of online and paper outcome measures: The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 11, 113-[7pp]. (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-11-113).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: augmenting validated paper versions of existing outcome measures with an equivalent online version may offer substantial research advantages (cost, rapidity and reliability). However, equivalence of online and paper questionnaires cannot be assumed, nor can acceptability to respondents. The aim was to test whether online and written versions of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), a standard measure of functional disability in back pain, are equivalent at both group and individual levels to establish whether they can be used interchangeably.

Methods: this is a within-participants equivalence study. 167 participants with back pain fully completed both the paper and online versions of the RMDQ in random order. Participants were recruited from a chiropractic clinic and patient support groups in Southern England. Limits of equivalence were pre-defined as 0.5 RMDQ points, the Bland-Altman range was calculated, and participants' comments were examined using content analysis.

Results: the mean score difference was 0.03 (SD = 1.43), with the 95% Confidence Interval falling entirely within our limits of equivalence (-0.19 to 0.25). The Bland-Altman range was -2.77 to 2.83 RMDQ points. Participants identified unique advantages and disadvantages associated with each version of the RMDQ.

Conclusions: the group and individual level data suggest that online and paper versions of the RMDQ are equivalent and can be used interchangeably. The Bland-Altman range appears to reflect the known measurement properties of the RMDQ. Furthermore, participants' comments confirmed the potential value to be had from offering them the choice of completing the RMDQ online or on paper

PDF
1471-2474-11-113.pdf - Version of Record
Available under License Other.
Download (501kB)

More information

Published date: 2010

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 168249
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/168249
PURE UUID: 5b890523-64d2-4c1a-9b49-c8cca04b76c0
ORCID for Felicity L. Bishop: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8737-6662

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 26 Nov 2010 08:59
Last modified: 06 Jun 2018 12:47

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×