목적: 라이프스타일 행동에 반영된 가치체계를 측정하기 위한 Yonsei Lifestyle Profile-Values (YLP-V)의 구성타당도와 신뢰도를 검증하였다. 연구방법: 온라인 리서치 기관에 등록된 만 55세 이상의 지역사회 거주 중고령자 및 노인 300명을 대상으로 YLP-V를 사용하여 자료를 수집하였다. 수집된 자료는 기술통계, 차별기능문항, 요인분석을 실시하였다. 요인분석은 요인구조 추정을 위한 탐색적 요인분석과 4가지 경쟁모델(단일요인, 계층적 요인, 다차원 요인, 이중요인)에 대한 확인적 요인분석을 통해 비교하고 타당성을 확인하였다. 결과: 목표회전을 통한 탐색적 요인분석 결과, YLP-V의 활동(activity, 5문항), 관심(interest, 4문항), 의견 (opinion, 9문항)에서 목표행렬에서 0.4 이상의 부하량을 갖는 것을 확인하였다. 확인적 요인분석 결과, 이중요인 모델(χ2 = 164.58**, degree of freedom = 117, root mean square error of approximation = 0.05, standard root mean residual = 0.04, comparative fit index = 0.95, Turker Lewis index = 0.93)이 가장 우수하게 나타났다. 결론: 라이프스타일에서 미시적 접근이 가능한 YLP-V 개발 근거와 일관성 있는 요인구조를 확인하였다. 이는 YLP-V가 총 18문항의 활동, 관심, 의견에 대한 이중요인 구조로 타당성을 확인하였으며, 건강 라이프스타 일에서 행동에 반영된 가치체계 측정과 이해에서 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Background: Although the original version of the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires are found to be acceptable, the cross-culturally adapted versions may not be comparable to their original version. Objects: To examine dimensionality and construct validity of two Korean versions of the brief version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) and EuroQOL-5 dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Methods: A total of 77 cancer survivors undergoing palliative rehabilitation programs from two rehabilitation institutes was recruited from April 16, 2018 to June 26, 2019. The WHOQOL- BREF and the EQ-5D were filled out by the various cancer survivors following a particular session of rehabilitation programs. The scores were analyzed with Winsteps Rasch analysis computer program using the rating scale model. Rasch fit statistics were used to determine the dimensionality and the item difficulty calibrations of WHOQOL-BREF and EQ-5D. Results: All items except two, negative feeling, need treatment function and pain prevent activity (mean square [MnSq] = 2.42, 1.82 and 2.51, respectively), were found to be acceptable, while two items of the EQ-5D, anxiety/depression and self-care, were misfit (infit MnSq = 1.65 and 0.38, respectively). Item difficulty calibrations of WHOQOL-BREF match person ability measures (i.e., HRQOL) fairly well. However, the person ability distribution showed obvious ceiling effects for EQ-5D. All items of EQ-5D were appeared to be less challenged in comparison with those of WHOQOL-BREF. Conclusion: Item-level analysis using the Rasch model supports the quality of culturally adapted items used to measure the HRQOL one exception; that is, whether or not to include misfit items as part of the HRQOL measurements. Additionally, cancer survivors undergoing palliative rehabilitation programs appear to have more of a tendency to view the EQ-5D items as being more challenging than the WHOQOL-BREF.