Validation of a New International Quality-of-Life Instrument Specific to Cosmetics and Physical Appearance: BeautyQoL Questionnaire | Dermatology | JAMA Dermatology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.186.91. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Spilker B. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:1-11
2.
Ganz PA. Impact of quality of life outcomes on clinical practice.  Oncology (Williston Park). 1995;9(11):(suppl)  61-658608057PubMedGoogle Scholar
3.
Patzer GL. Improving self-esteem by improving physical attractiveness.  J Esthet Dent. 1997;9(1):44-469468878PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Sadick NS. The impact of cosmetic interventions on quality of life.  Dermatol Online J. 2008;14(8):219061562PubMedGoogle Scholar
5.
Korichi R, Pelle-de-Queral D, Gazano G, Aubert A. Why women use makeup: implication of psychological traits in makeup functions.  J Cosmet Sci. 2008;59(2):127-13718408870PubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Korichi R, Pelle-de-Queral D, Gazano G, Aubert A. Relation between facial morphology, personality and the functions of facial make-up in women.  Int J Cosmet Sci. 2011;33(4):338-34521284661PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Tanioka M, Miyachi Y. Camouflage for vitiligo.  Dermatol Ther. 2009;22(1):90-9319222521PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Wang KY, Wang KH, Zhang ZP. Health-related quality of life and marital quality of vitiligo patients in China.  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011;25(4):429-43520666878PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Zip C. The impact of acne on quality of life.  Skin Therapy Lett. 2007;12(10):7-918227954PubMedGoogle Scholar
10.
Hayashi N, Imori M, Yanagisawa M, Seto Y, Nagata O, Kawashima M. Make-up improves the quality of life of acne patients without aggravating acne eruptions during treatments.  Eur J Dermatol. 2005;15(4):284-28716048760PubMedGoogle Scholar
11.
Dunn LK, O’Neill JL, Feldman SR. Acne in adolescents: quality of life, self-esteem, mood, and psychological disorders.  Dermatol Online J. 2011;17(1):1http://dermatology.cdlib.org/1701/1_review/1_10-00256/feldman.html. Accessed September 1201221272492PubMedGoogle Scholar
12.
Holme SA, Beattie PE, Fleming CJ. Cosmetic camouflage advice improves quality of life.  Br J Dermatol. 2002;147(5):946-94912410705PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Deshayes P. Cosmetic camouflage for a better quality of life.  Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2008;135:(suppl 3)  S208-S21018342131PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), I: conceptual framework and item selection.  Med Care. 1992;30(6):473-4831593914PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Juniper E, Guyatt G, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:49-56
16.
Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.  Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297-334Google ScholarCrossref
17.
March HW, Balla JR, Mc Donald RP. Goodness of fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: the effect of sample size.  Psychol Bull. 1988;103(3):391-410Google ScholarCrossref
18.
Nunnally J, Bernstein I. Statistical foundations. In: Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH, eds. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1994:31-208
19.
Iyengar SS, Lepper MR. When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing?  J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;79(6):995-100611138768PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Altabe M. Ethnicity and body image: quantitative and qualitative analysis.  Int J Eat Disord. 1998;23(2):153-1599503240PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Loh LC. Racial differences influence health-related quality-of-life measurements.  Chest. 2012;141(2):570-571, author reply 57122315127PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Calvert M, Duffy H, Freemantle N, Davis R, Lip GY, Gill P. Population health status of South Asian and African-Caribbean communities in the United Kingdom.  BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):10122533538PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.  EFA Flagship Initiatives: Multi-partner Collaborative Mechanisms in Support of EFA Goals. Paris, France: UNESCO; 2004:51. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001356/135639e.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012
24.
Dyble T, Ashton J. Use of emollients in the treatment of dry skin conditions.  Br J Community Nurs. 2011;16(5):214, 216, 218 passim21642925PubMedGoogle Scholar
25.
Xhauflaire-Uhoda E, Haubrechts C, Piérard-Franchimont C, Piérard GE. Quality of life, emollients and hydrating agents.  Rev Med Liege. 2006;61(4):233-23616789609PubMedGoogle Scholar
Study
Nov 2012

Validation of a New International Quality-of-Life Instrument Specific to Cosmetics and Physical Appearance: BeautyQoL Questionnaire

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Data Mining International, Geneva, Switzerland (Dr Beresniak); Laboratory for Applied Research in Health Economics, Paris-Descartes University, Paris, France (Dr Beresniak); L’Oréal Research, Clichy, France (Ms de Linares); Department of Dermatology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City (Dr Krueger); Department of Dermatology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Dr Talarico); Department of Drug Policy and Management, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan (Dr Tsutani); Laboratory of Health Systems Analyses, Centre National de Recherche Scientifique, Claude Bernard University, Lyon, France (Dr Duru); and Department of Biophysics, Pierre-Marie Curie University, Paris, France (Dr Berger).

Arch Dermatol. 2012;148(11):1275-1282. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.2696
Abstract

Objective To develop a new quality-of-life (QoL) instrument with international validity that specifically assesses cosmetic products and physical appearance.

Design In the first phase, semidirected interviews involved 309 subjects. In the second stage, an acceptability study was performed on 874 subjects. Thereafter, we recruited a total of 3231 subjects, each of whom completed the BeautyQoL questionnaire, a clinical checklist for the skin, the generic QoL 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and a sociodemographic questionnaire. A retest was performed 8 days later on a subgroup of 652 subjects.

Setting Populations in France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Italy, Russia, the United States, Brazil, Japan, India, China, and South Africa, representing 16 languages.

Participants The general adult healthy population, including women and men.

Main Outcome Measures Psychometric properties, construct validity, reproducibility, and internal and external consistency.

Results General acceptability was very good in the 16 languages, with a very low rate of no answers. The validation phase reduced the questionnaire to 42 questions structured in the following 5 dimensions that explained 76.7% of the total variance: social life, self-confidence, mood, energy, and attractiveness. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α coefficients, 0.93-0.98). Reproducibility at 8 days was satisfactory in all dimensions. Results of external validity testing revealed that BeautyQoL scores correlated significantly with all 36-Item Short Form Health Survey scores except for physical function.

Conclusion These results demonstrate the validity and reliability of the BeautyQoL questionnaire as the very first international instrument specific to cosmetic products and physical appearance.

×