A protocol for Italian validation of DEMQoL-Proxy Scale: assessing the Quality of Life of people with moderate or mild dementia.

Main Article Content

Chiara Bonfigliuoli
Alessandra Miraglia Raineri
Chiara Foa’
Alessia Guizzardi
Giovanna Artioli
Leopoldo Sarli


Quality of Life; Dementia; Content Validity; Face Validity; Back-translation


In this paper, we propose an adaptation of a protocol for a tool’s validation. We have utilized this phases-theory to validate in Italian language an instrument to assess Quality of Life for people with moderate or mild dementia. We will explain the example of our Italian validation of DEMQoL-Proxy considering each De Vellis’s phase. We will explain our application of De Vellis’s model to Italian example described. For the first three phases, we reproduced the original validating study in which authors (Smith et al., 2005) defined what to measure, how generate a set of items and the structure of the scale. Indeed, for the last five phases we explained the adaptation of De Vellis’s model to Italian validation. We hope that this model could be effective to validating goals, for researchers and in particular for all professionals who deal with caregivers and patients with moderate and mild dementia. Furthermore, the measurement of the Quality of Life makes the scale widely useful within the various professional specialties and setting. Finally, thanks to the methodological assumptions adopted following the De Vellis’s eight-phase model, we can affirm that this first Italian pre-validation of the DEMQoL-Proxy seems to be an excellent forerunner for its effective validation in the Italian context.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 280 | PDF Downloads 117


1. De Vellis, RF. Scale Development. Theory and applications. Newbury Park: Sage. 1991.
2. Smith S C, Lamping D L, Banerjee S, Harwood R, Foley B, Smith B, Cook JC, Murray J, Prince M, Levin E, Mann A, Knapp M. Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL. Psychol Med 2005; 37(5) 737- 746.
3. Ready R E, Ott B R. Quality of Life measures for dementia. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 11.
4. Mulhern B, Rowen D, Brazier J, Smith S C, Romeo R, Tait R, Banerjee S. Development of DEMQOL-U and DEMQOL-PROXY -U: Generation of preference-based indices from DEMQOL and DEMQOL-PROXY for use in economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2013; 17: 26-27.
5. Chua K, Brown A, Little R, Matthews D, Morton L, Loftus V, Watchurst C, Tait R, Romeo R, Banerjee S. Quality-of-life assessment in dementia: the use of DEMQOL and DEMQoL-Proxy total scores. Qual Life Res. 2016; 25(12): 3107–3118.
6. Hambleton R K. Translating achievement tests for use in cross-cultural studies. Eur J Psychol Assess 1993; 57- 68.
7. Hambleton R K. guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. Eur J Psychol As- sess 1994; 229-244.
8. Smith S, Lamping D L, Banerjee S, et al. Measurement of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: development of a new instrument (DEMQOL) and an evaluation of current methodology. Int J Technol Assess Health Careint 2005; 9(10): 1-93.
9. Davis L L. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. App Nurs Res 1992; 5(4): 194-197.
10. Grant J S, Davis L L. Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Res Nurs Health 1997; 20(3): 269-274.
11. Wynd C A, Schmidt, B, Schaefer, M A. Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity. Wes J Nurs Res 2003; 25(5): 508-518.
12. Polit D F, Beck, C T. e content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2006; 29(5): 489-497.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >>