The SF-36 summary scales were valid, reliable, and equivalent in a Chinese population

Abstract 

Objectives

To find out whether the SF-36 physical and mental health summary (PCS and MCS) scales are valid and equivalent in the Chinese population in Hong Kong (HK).

Study Design and Setting

The SF-36 data of a cross-sectional study on 2,410 Chinese adults randomly selected from the general population in HK were analyzed.

Results

The hypothesized two-factor structure of the physical and mental health summary scales (PCS and MCS) was replicated and the expected differences in scores between known morbidity groups were shown. The internal reliability coefficients of the PCS and MCS scales ranged from 0.85 to 0.87. The effect size differences between the U.S. standard and HK-specific PCS and MCS scores were mostly <0.5. The effect size differences in the standard PCS and MCS scores of specific groups between the U.S. and H.K. populations were all <0.5.

Conclusion

The PCS and MCS scales were applicable to the Chinese population in HK. The high level of measurement equivalence of the scales between the U.S. and H.K. populations suggests that data pooling between the two populations could be possible. To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that the SF-36 summary scales are valid and equivalent in an Asian population.

Keywords: Health-related quality of life, SF-36 summary scales, Construct validity, Reliability, Cross-cultural equivalence, Chinese