The Short Form 36 English and Chinese versions were equivalent in a multiethnic Asian population
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.12.016
Saved in:
Main Authors: | Tan, M.L.S., Wee, H.-L., Lee, J., Ma, S., Heng, D., Tai, E.-S., Thumboo, J. |
---|---|
Other Authors: | SAW SWEE HOCK SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH |
Format: | Article |
Published: |
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/108819 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | National University of Singapore |
Similar Items
-
Reliability and validity of the English (Singapore) and Chinese (Singapore) versions of the Short-Form 36 version 2 in a multi-ethnic Urban Asian population in Singapore
by: Thumboo, J., et al.
Published: (2014) -
Are English- and Chinese-language versions of the SF-6D equivalent? a comparison from a population-based study
by: Wee, H.-L., et al.
Published: (2014) -
The equivalence of English and Chinese SF-36 versions in bilingual Singapore Chinese
by: Thumboo, J., et al.
Published: (2014) -
Measurement equivalence of the English, Chinese and Malay versions of the World Health Organization quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF) questionnaires
by: Cheung, YB, et al.
Published: (2019) -
Association of body mass index with Short-Form 36 physical and mental component summary scores in a multiethnic Asian population
by: Wee, H.-L., et al.
Published: (2011)