Content validity of the quality of dying and death questionnaire- revised global-version in North American inpatient hospices

CONTEXT: Enhancing end-of-life care requires valid measurement of the quality of dying and death, but existing measures of this outcome have limited applicability across varied cultural and resource settings. To address this gap, we revised the Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire (QODD) to create the QODD-Revised Global Version (QODD-RGV). OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the content validity of the QODD-RGV questionnaire in North American inpatient hospice settings based on item relevance, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness. METHODS: Bereaved caregivers of patients who died in inpatient hospices in Canada and the United States were recruited 4-6 months after death of the patient. Participants completed the QODD-RGV, a 26-item measure assessing the experience of patients in the last week of life regarding symptoms, care preferences, and social support. Cognitive interviews were conducted with verbal probing and think-aloud techniques to evaluate the participants' understanding of the items and the information they relied upon to make their ratings. Interview transcripts were coded independently by two team members followed by consensus coding. Qualitative content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Eighteen cognitive interview protocols were completed. Participants indicated that their ratings were most commonly based on information from the perspective of the patient or themselves. The most common judgment strategy was comparison to "a hoped for or ideal dying experience," followed by "a state of distress/no distress." All respondents used multiple standards of comparison. Response difficulty was most frequently due to lack of communication with the patient. No single item was consistently misunderstood, but there was uncertainty about the ratings of some items due to limited caregiver knowledge or time spent communicating with the patient. CONCLUSION: The present study with bereaved caregivers in North American inpatient hospice settings provides preliminary evidence supporting the content validity of the QODD-RGV in North American hospice settings based on relevance, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness of the items.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353561
Primary Topic
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Content validity of the quality of dying and death questionnaire- revised global-version in North American inpatient hospices

Mary Goombs, Argin Malakian, Manokaraananthan Chandrakumar, Alyssa Tilly et al.
PLoS ONE
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
article

Content validity of the quality of dying and death questionnaire- revised global-version in North American inpatient hospices

Mary Goombs, Argin Malakian, Manokaraananthan Chandrakumar, Alyssa Tilly, Gary Rodin, Camilla Zimmermann, Sarah Hales, Kayla Wolofsky, Jared E. Lowe, Nadine Persaud
article en

Abstract

CONTEXT: Enhancing end-of-life care requires valid measurement of the quality of dying and death, but existing measures of this outcome have limited applicability across varied cultural and resource settings. To address this gap, we revised the Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire (QODD) to create the QODD-Revised Global Version (QODD-RGV). OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the content validity of the QODD-RGV questionnaire in North American inpatient hospice settings based on item relevance, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness. METHODS: Bereaved caregivers of patients who died in inpatient hospices in Canada and the United States were recruited 4-6 months after death of the patient. Participants completed the QODD-RGV, a 26-item measure assessing the experience of patients in the last week of life regarding symptoms, care preferences, and social support. Cognitive interviews were conducted with verbal probing and think-aloud techniques to evaluate the participants' understanding of the items and the information they relied upon to make their ratings. Interview transcripts were coded independently by two team members followed by consensus coding. Qualitative content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Eighteen cognitive interview protocols were completed. Participants indicated that their ratings were most commonly based on information from the perspective of the patient or themselves. The most common judgment strategy was comparison to "a hoped for or ideal dying experience," followed by "a state of distress/no distress." All respondents used multiple standards of comparison. Response difficulty was most frequently due to lack of communication with the patient. No single item was consistently misunderstood, but there was uncertainty about the ratings of some items due to limited caregiver knowledge or time spent communicating with the patient. CONCLUSION: The present study with bereaved caregivers in North American inpatient hospice settings provides preliminary evidence supporting the content validity of the QODD-RGV in North American hospice settings based on relevance, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness of the items.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(7)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), University of North Carolina Health Care (US), University of Toronto (CA), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA), Kensington Health (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.