Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Field Methods
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1525822X07313812v1
20/2/179    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schwarzwalder, A.
Right arrow Articles by Lynch, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Testing a Tool to Scale Quality of Life Indicators in Tanzania

Alison Schwarzwalder1*, Zephania Chilangwa2, Ilesh Patel3, Andrew Burke4, and Matthew Lynch5

1 Columbia University
2 Kongwa Trachoma Project
3 Royal Adelaide Hospital
4 Oregon Health and Science University
5 Johns Hopkins University

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: aws71{at}columbia.edu.


   Abstract
A quality of life questionnaire utilizing scaled response codes is created for implementation in a predominantly rural African setting. The authors design a concrete tool using color as a semantic differential as a means to ease semantic shifts and enhance participant comprehension. Although they find a fairly even response distribution and no significant clustering among a sample of questions for which the tool is used, their interviewers report that some groups have more difficulty than others and suggest alternative or complementary approaches. This article describes the authors’ experience with the utility of their tool within the parameters of this study.

First published on March 3, 2008, doi:10.1177/1525822X07313812

Field Methods 2008;20:179.

A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2008


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?