Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to assess the validity of COOP charts in a general population sample, to examine whether illustrations contribute to instrument validity, and to establish general population norms. Methods: A general population mail survey was conducted among 20–79 years old residents of the Swiss canton of Vaud. Participants were invited to complete COOP charts, the SF-36 Health Survey; they also provided data on health service use in the previous month. Two thirds of the respondents received standard COOP charts, the rest received charts without illustrations. Results: Overall 1250 persons responded (54%). The presence of illustrations did not affect score distributions, except that the illustrated ‘physical fitness’ chart drew greater non-response (10 vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Validity tests were similar for illustrated and picture-less charts. Factor analysis yielded two principal components, corresponding to physical and mental health. Six COOP charts showed strong and nearly linear relationships with corresponding SF36 scores (all p < 0.001), demonstrating concurrent validity. Similarly, most COOP charts were associated with the use of medical services in the past month. Only the chart on ‘social support’ partly deviated from construct validity hypotheses. Population norms revealed a generally lower health status in women and an age-related decline in physical health. Conclusions: COOP charts can be used to assess the health status of a general population. Their validity is good, with the possible exception of the ‘social support’ chart. The illustrations do not affect the properties of this instrument.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nelson E, Wasson J, Kirk J, et al. Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: description of the COOP chart method and preliminary findings. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 55S–63S.
Beaufait DW, Nelson EC, Landgraf JM, et al. COOP measures of functional status. In: Stewart M, Tudiver F, Bass MJ, Dunn EV, Norton PG (eds) Tools for Primary Care Research, Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1992, pp. 151–167.
van Weel C, König-Zahn C, Touw-Otten FWMM, van Duijn NP, Meyerboom-de Jong B. Measuring health status with the COOP/WONCA charts. A manual. Groningen: Northern Centre for Health Care Research (NCH), 1995.
Perneger TV, Leplège A, Guillain H, Ecosse E, Etter JF. COOP charts in French: translation and preliminary data on instrument properties. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 683–692.
Kempen GI, van Sonderen E, Sanderman R. Measuring health status with the Dartmouth COOP charts in low-functioning elderly. Do the illustrations affect the out-comes? Qual Life Res 1997; 6: 323–328.
Larson CO, Hays RD, Nelson EC. Do the pictures influence scores on the Dartmouth COOP charts? Qual Life Res 1992; 1: 247–249.
Richard JL, Bouzourene K, Gallant S, et al. Validation et normes du SF-36 dans la population du canton de Vaud [in French]. Lausanne: Institute of social and preventive medicine, 2000 (Raisons de Santé 28).
Leplège A, Ecosse E, Verdier A, Perneger TV. The French SF-36 Health Survey: translation, cultural adaptation, and preliminary psychometric evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1013–1023.
Scott-Lennox JA, Wu AW, Boyer JG, Ware JE. Reliability and validity of French, German, Italian, Dutch and UK English translations of the Medical Outcomes Study HIV health survey. Med Care 1999; 37: 908–925.
McHorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247–263.
Weinberg S. Applied Linear Regression, 2nd edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985.
Dawson-Saunders B, Trapp RG. Basic and Clinical Biosta-tistics. Norwalk, CN: Appleton & Lange, 1990, pp 165–166.
Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Bonsel GJ, Aaronson NK. An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures. The Nottingham Health Profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQol instrument. Med Care 1997; 35: 522–537.
Kinnersley P, Peters T, Stott N. Measuring functional health status in primary care using the COOP-WONCA charts: acceptability, range of scores, construct validity, reliability and sensitivity to change. Br J Gen Practice 1994; 44: 545–549.
Mc Horney C, Ware JE, Rogers W, Raczek AE, Lu JFR. The validity and relative precision of MOS short-and long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts. Med Care 1992; 30: MS253–265.
Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. Br Med J 1992; 305: 160–164.
Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey. Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: The Health Institute, 1993.
Westbury RC, Rogers TB, Briggs TE, et al. A multinational study of the factorial structure and other characteristics of the Dartmouth COOP functional health assessment charts/WONCA. Fam Pract 1997; 14: 478–485.
Nelson EC, Landgraf JM, Hays RD, Wasson JH, Kirk JW. The functional status of patients. How can it be measured in physicians' offices? Med Care 1990; 28: 1111–1126.
Penning MJ, Strain LA. Gender di€erences in disability, assistance, and subjective well-being in later life. J Gerontol 1994; 49: S202–S208.
Ferrer M, Lamarca R, Orfila F, Alonso J. Comparison of performance-based and self-rated functional capacity in Spanish elderly. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149: 228–235.
Jylha M, Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Jokela J, Heikkinen E. Is self-rated health comparable across cultures and genders? J Genrontol A Biol Sci Med 1998; 53: S144–S152.
Siemiatycki J, Campbell S. Nonresponse bias and early versus all responders in mail and telephone surveys. Am J Epidemiol 1984; 120: 291–301.
Hoeymans N, Feskens EJ, Van Den Bos GA, Kromhout D. Non-response bias in a study of cardiovascular diseases, functional status and self-rated health among elderly men. Age Ageing 1998; 27: 35–40.
Etter JF, Perneger TV. Analysis of non-response bias in a mailed health survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 1123–1128.
Perneger TV, LepleÁ ge A, Etter JF. Cross-cultural adapta-tion of a psychometric instrument: two methods compared. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 1037–1046.
Palmer RH. Commentary: assessment of function in routine clinical practice. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 65S–69S.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Perneger, T., Chamot, E., Etter, JF. et al. Assessment of the COOP charts with and without pictures in a Swiss population. Qual Life Res 9, 405–414 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008965321161
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008965321161