Table 3 Description of included studies and tools
From: Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review
Qualitative tools | ||||||||
No. | Tool | No. of items | Author (year) country | Study Aim | Focus of tool | Language of tool | Target population | Method |
1. | Interview | 8 | Weaver et al., (2014) [23], Canada | M | Health and diabetes self-management | English | Adults with diabetes | Measurement via semi-structured interviews; Analysis via two researchers |
n.a. | Ndomoto et al. (2018) [24], UK | M | Health | English | Adults living in rural Kenya and urban deprived UK | Measurement via key informant interviews; FG and participant observation. | ||
10 | Sauter et al. (2018) [25], Germany | D/M | Health enhancing PA | German/English | Older adults living in senior residences | Development of interview-guide by RT based on Anand’s capability questionnaire [35] and literature on older adult’s physical activity; Measurement via semi-structured interviews | ||
26/21 | Chakraborty et al. (2020) [26] | D/M | Healthy children’s growth | Bangla/English | children living in hoar region of Bangladesh | Development of FG and individual interview guide by RT based on literature review and pilot testing; Measurement via FG and in-depth interviews with parents | ||
2. | Videography | n.a. | Petros et al. (2016) [28], USA | M | Mental health recovery | English | Adults with mental illness | Four-week measurement via videography on the topic Tell us about your recovery; No RT present during recording; Transcription and analysis of data by RT |
Mixed method | ||||||||
No. | Instrument | No. of items | Author (year) country | Study Aim | Focus of Tool | Language of tool | Target population | Method |
3. | Questionnaire and Interview | 20 | Bucki et al. (2016) [43], Luxembourg | C | Health | Luxembourgish, Portuguese, French, German | Adult care givers | Measurement of relations between health capability factors of care givers using questionnaire-based (HCFC-8) interviews. Statistical analysis using Monte Carlo Markov Chain algorithms. |
Quantitative tools | ||||||||
No. | Instrument | No. of items | Author (year) country | Study Aim | Focus of Tool | Language of tool | Target population | Method |
4. | Questionnaires used in secondary data | n.a. | Abu-Zaineh & Woode (2018) [44], France | M | Health and self-management | English | Young adults living in Palestine | Measurement of capabilities (health awareness, knowledge and living conditions) via Exploratory Structural Equation Modelling using data from the Palestinian Family Survey. |
n.a. | Anand et al. (2005) [41], UK | M | General WB | English | Adults living in British households | Measurement of capabilities and well-being by regression using data of the British Household Panel Survey | ||
n.a. | Douptcheva et al. (2014) [45], UK | M | Health | English | Women living in Accra | Measurement of capabilities and functionings to identify factors that influence our health using data from the Women’s Health Study of Accra – Wave II. | ||
1760 | Tellez et al. (2016) [46], France | M | WB | French | Older adults | Measurement of capabilities (freedom to perform self-care activities, freedom to participate in life of the household) by use of a latent variable modelling framework analyzing the 2008 Disability and Health Household Survey of France. | ||
n.a. | Zwierzchowski and Panek (2020) [47], Poland | M | Subjective WB | Polish | General population ≥ 16 | Measurement of capabilities and subjective well-being using the multiple indicator multiple cause model on the European-Survey of Income and Living Conditions in Poland (2015) | ||
5. | ICECAP/ ICECAP-O | 5 | Coast et al. (2008) [31], UK | D | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Lay terms defined by RT based on in-depth interviews [48]. Iterative semi-structured interviews to ensure understandable language. Valuation via survey interviews. |
5 | Coast et al. (2008) [49], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Validation via Chi-square analysis against socio-demographic information, health, nature of locality and environment, social support, participation, and comparison of data to priori set RT-expectations | ||
5 | Flynn et al. (2011) [50], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Construct validity measurement of tariff scores (Comparison with qualitative interviews of attribute development [51] and subjective wellbeing literature) | ||
5 | Couzner et al. (2012) [52], Australia | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Measurement of relationship of ICECAP-O to EQ-5D and CTM-3 through Spearman’s rho, t-tests and chi-square tests. | ||
5 | Makai et al. (2012) [53], Netherlands | D/PP | General WB | Dutch | Adults ≥65 | Forward-backward-translation into Dutch by two independent translators; Measurement of concurrent (correlations of the nursing and family version with EQ-5D, EQ-VAS, Cantril’s ladder, overall life satisfaction) and discriminant validity (chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests) | ||
5 | Davis et al. (2013) [54], Canada | C/PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Comparison against the EQ-5D using EFA | ||
5 | Makai et al. (2013) [55], Netherlands | PP | General WB | Dutch | Adults ≥65 | Measurement of convergent (correlation with EQ-5D, IADL, GDS-15, SPF-IL and Cantril’s ladder) and discriminant validity (t test, one-way ANOVA and stepwise regression analyses) | ||
5 | Horwood et al. (2014) [56], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Face-validity measurement via “think aloud” study analysis and frequency of participant’s problems | ||
5 | Hörder et al. (2016) [57], Sweden | PP | General WB | Swedish | Adults ≥65 | Test-retest reliability (1–2 weeks apart) and item relevance measure (participants rated items from 0 to 100) | ||
5 | Davis et al. (2017) [54], Canada | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Measurement of responsiveness (regression on age, sex, and faller status) | ||
5 | Sarabia-Cobo et al. (2017) [58], Spain | PP | General WB | Spanish | Adults ≥65 | Measurement of construct (factor analysis) and convergent validity (correlation with dimensions of the EQ-5D + C, ADRQL, ADL), and reliability (internal consistency-Cronbach Alpha) | ||
5 | Franklin et al. (2018) [59], UK | C/PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Comparison of (1) tariff scores using OLS and CLAD regression models and (2) domain scores using MNL regression against the EQ-5D-3L | ||
5 | Milte et al. (2018) [60], Australia | C/PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥65 | Comparison against the EQ-5D-3L using Spearman correlation coefficient and multiple linear regression | ||
5 | Mitchell et al. (2020) [61], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adult ≥65 | Measurement of response validity among people requiring kidney care using a think-aloud study | ||
5 | Baji et al. (2020) [62], Hungary | D/PP | General WB | Hungarian | Adult ≥65 | RT translated original version into Hungarian; forward-backward translation; interviews (n = 15) to assess comprehensiveness and relevance; Measurement of: construct validity (one-way subgroup comparison and regression analysis); convergent validity (Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation (with EQ-5D-5L, EQ VAS, WHO-5; happiness and satisfaction VAS,SWLS); Test-retest reliability (ICC baseline and 5% of participants right after baseline | ||
6. | ICECAP-A | 5 | Al-Janabi et al. (2012) [32], UK | D | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Identification of important components of life through in-depth interviews; Iterative semi-structured interviews to refine attributes to a self-completion measure with one item per attribute |
5 | Al-Janabi et al. (2013) [63], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Think-aloud and semi-structured interviews to assess the feasibility of a self-reporting capability measurement | ||
5 | Al-Janabi et al. (2013) [64], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Measurement of construct validity (univariate analysis and correlations based on hypotheses made in advance) | ||
5 | Al-Janabi et al. (2015) [65], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Measurement of test-retest reliability (ICC- baseline and 2-week capability index scores) | ||
5 | Keeley et al. (2015) [66], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Measurement of responsiveness (anchor-based analysis; anchors: EQ-5D-3L, GAD-7, PHQ-8) | ||
5 | Goranitis et al. (2016) [67], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Measure of acceptability, construct validity (convergent: Pearson’s correlation with EQ-5D-3L and ICIQ-OAB, Spearman’s correlation coefficient across dimension scores, and index and dimension scores; discriminant: one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis H test) | ||
5 | Goranitis et al. (2016) [68], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Assessment of construct validity (convergent: Pearson’s correlation with EQ-5D-5L; Discriminant: univariate and multivariate analysis) and sensitivity to change | ||
5 | Mitchell et al. (2017) [69], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adults ≥18 | Concept-mapping from condition-specific and capability items; Discriminant validity testing (Mann-Whitney U test using DASS-D and K10 data; Multivariable regression analysis using OLS) | ||
5 | Linton et al. (2018) [70], Germany | PP | General WB | German | Adults ≥18 | Measurement of internal-consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha), convergent (Pearson’s correlation with EQ-5D-3L, SF-6D, SWLS scores), and construct validity (OLS regressions) | ||
5 | Tang et al. (2018) [51], China | D/PP | General WB | Chinese | Adults ≥18 | RT translated original version into Chinese; FG evaluated appropriateness of the translation; pilot testing; backward translation; online-survey to check acceptability, reliability (item correlations), and validity (EFA and correlations with EQ-5D-3L and EQ-VAS) | ||
5 | Holst-Kristensen et al. (2020) [43], Denmark | D/PP | General WB | Danish | Adult ≥18 | RT translated original version into Danish; forward-backward translation; pilot-testing in general population | ||
5 | Shahataheri et al. (2020) [29], Iran | D/PP | General WB | Persian | Adult ≥18 | RT translated original version into Persian; forward-backward translation; pilot-testing in general population; Measurement of test-retest reliability (ICC-baseline and 2-week) | ||
5 | Mah et al. (2020) [71], Canada | PP | General WB | English | Adult ≥18 | Measurement of construct validity: discriminant (t test, linear trend analysis or multiple regression); convergent (correlation with measures of the same concept: AQoL-8D, EQ-5D-5L, HUI-3, SF- 6D) | ||
5 | Mitchell et al. (2020) [61], UK | PP | General WB | English | Adult ≥18 | Measurement of response validity among people requiring kidney care using a think-aloud study | ||
5 | Baji et al. (2020) [62], Hungary | D/PP | General WB | Hungarian | Adult ≥18 | RT translated original version into Hungarian; forward-backward translation; interviews (n = 15) to assess comprehensiveness and relevance; Measurement of: construct validity (one-way subgroup comparison and regression analysis); convergent validity (Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation (with EQ-5D-5L, EQ VAS, WHO-5; happiness and satisfaction VAS,SWLS); Test-retest reliability (ICC baseline and 5% of participants right after baseline | ||
7. | ICECAP-SCM | 7 | Sutton & Coast (2014) [33], UK | D | WB in end of life care | English | People at end of life | Interviews to determine conceptual elements of a good death; follow-up interviews to check conceptual attributes |
8. | ICECAP-FC | 10 | Al-Janabi (2018) [34], UK | D | WB capabilities and functionings | English | Adults ≥18 | ICECAP-A modified with additional question on functioning to each attribute by RT |
9. | OCAP | 64 | Anand et al. (2009) [35], UK | D | General Capabilities (e.g. enjoying recreational time, political views, making friends bodily health and integrity) | English | Adults ≥18 | Development of items based on Nussbaum criteria [72] |
10. | OCAP-18 | 18 | Lorgelly et al. (2015) [42], UK | D | General Capabilities (e.g. enjoying recreational time, political views, making friends bodily health and integrity) | English | Adults ≥18 | Items, based on OCAP-questionnaire [35], reduced on analysis of FG, cognitive interviews, and factor analysis |
11. | OxCAP-MH | 16 | Simon et al. (2013) [36], UK | D/PP | General capabilities for mental health | English | Adults ≥18 with a mental illness | Adaption of the OCAP-18 [20] based on expert-FG and validation (correlation with GAF, EQ-5D-VAS, EQ-5D-3L) |
16 | Vergunst et al. (2017) [49], UK | PP | General capabilities for mental health | English | Adults ≥18 with a mental illness | Measurement of internal-consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), test-retest (1-week apart; ICC), and construct validity (correlation with EQ-5D, BPRS, GAS, SIX) | ||
16 | Simon et al. (2018) [30], UK | D/PP | General capabilities for mental health | English | Adults ≥18 with a mental illness | Forward-backward-translation of OxCAP-MH into German and linguistic validation through German native speakers | ||
16 | Laszewska et al. (2019) [73], Austria | C/PP | General capabilities for mental health | German | Adults ≥18 with a mental illness | Comparison against the EQ-5D-5L (EFA). Measurement of responsiveness (anchor questionnaires and standardized response mean), discriminant validity (subgroup comparison using t test and one-way ANOVA), and test-retest (ICC; baseline - max 30 days after) | ||
12. | CQ-CMH | 104 | Sacchetto et al. (2016) [37], Portugal | D/PP | Mental Health | Portuguese | Consumers of mental health services | FG interview data analysis; development of item/rating scale by steering committee and additional comparison with Nussbaum criteria [34]; Assessment of face-validity |
13. | ACQ-CMH-98 | 98 | Sacchetto et al. (2018) [38], Portugal | D/PP | Mental Health | Portuguese | Consumers of mental health services | Adaption of the CQ-CMH questionnaire [37] based on panel members judgement; Measurement of validity (correlation with WHOQOL-Bref, RAS, K6) |
14. | Capability-based questionnaire | 8 | Kinghorn et al. (2015) [39], UK | D | WB | English | People suffering from chronic pain | FG interview and individual interviews to identify list of important capabilities; Development of questionnaire for self-completion based on identified capabilities by RT |
15. | CADA | 34 | Ferrer et al. (2014) [40], USA | D | Physical Activity and Diet | English | Adults with obesity and diabetes | FG interviews were used to identify important themes; questionnaire created by RT based on themes |