|Scale||Domains addressed||Completion time/No. items||Response format||Accessibility||Validity||Reliability||Responsiveness||Floor/ Ceiling effects||Conclusions/recommendations of the reviews|
|ACTG SF-21 ||Physical functioning, energy/fatigue, social functioning, role functioning, cognition, pain, health perception and emotional well-being.||
4–5 mins |
|3–6 response options per item plus a visual analogue scale||Available in 2 languages .||No validity data available .||No internal consistency reported .||not stated||Likely to have similar floor and ceiling effects to other MOS measures .||not stated|
|HIV-QL31 ||Sex life, pain, psychological aspects, relationships, limitations caused by HIV, symptoms, impact of treatment and care||31 items||Yes/No||Available in English and French .||Discriminates between groups with different severity levels (construct validity) .||High internal consistency [17, 20].||not stated||not stated||QL-31 is a relatively sound and useful instrument where attention has been paid to the breadth of the concept as a result of listening to the concerns of patients. However it is culture-specific in the ways it has been designed .|
|MQOL-HIV ||Mental health, physical health, physical functioning, social functioning, social support, cognitive functioning, financial status, partner intimacy, sexual functioning, perceived access to medical care||
10 mins |
|Likert scale (never – always)||In a study comparing the MQOL-HIV with the MOS-HIV there were more missing data/incomplete responses on the MQOL-HIV ||
Discriminates between patients based on symptom severity, inpatient care and stage of illness .|
MQOL-HIV scores distinguished between AIDS, symptomatic
HIV, and asymptomatic cases, on 7 domains and overall QOL in one study however inadequate discrimination between disease stages was found in a Spanish study .
Good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha >0.70) for 8 of the 10 domains . Poor internal consistency for physical and mental health, physical and sexual functioning .|
Good test-retest reliability for all domains except cognitive functioning .
Poor test-retest reliability .
Somewhat responsive to change in the number of symptoms, viral load and CD4 count over a 3-month period .|
Responsive to perceived changes in quality of life over 6 months in one study however only five dimensions were sensitive to clinical changes during ART .
Less sensitive than the MOS-HIV for detecting changes after starting or switching ART. MOS-HIV detected change on a greater number of subscales .
Floor and/or ceiling effects were reported in some dimensions .|
Fewer problems with floor ceiling effects when compared to the MOS-20 .
The MQoL-HIV was not one of the reviewed measures recommended by Clayson et al. |
A relatively sound and useful measure where attention has been paid to patient input and the breadth of the concept however the instrument is culture-specific .
|PROQOL-HIV [38, 41]||8 scored domains: Physical health and symptoms, treatment impact, emotional distress, health concerns, body change, intimate relationships, social relationships, stigma and 4 additional items addressing religious beliefs, finance, having children and satisfaction with care.||
7 mins |
|Rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 = ‘never’ to 4 = “always”||not stated||not stated||not stated||not stated||not stated||No information reported in the reviews|
|MOS-HIV ||Two summary scores—the physical health score and mental health score and 10 domains: physical functioning, pain, social functioning, role functioning, emotional well-being, energy/fatigue, cognitive functioning, health distress, health transition, general health and overall quality of life||
10 mins [4, 12]|
|2–6 response options per item||
Translated into at least 14 languages, largely designed for industrialised world .|
English version takes approx. 5–10 min [4, 12, 20] but twice as long has been reported for the use of some translations, e.g. Spanish, where more words are needed to express the concepts .
Scoring/ interpretation is complex [12, 20].
Less missing data than MQOL-HIV .
Mixed reports regarding construct validity with some suggesting poor construct validity  and others suggesting good construct validity .|
Large body of evidence supporting convergent and discriminant validity [4, 12], although some studies have not found the expected relationship with CD4 count (construct validity) [12, 20].
Moderate /good internal consistency generally reported [4, 12, 19, 20] although Carabin reported good internal consistency for some but not all domains .|
Inadequate test-retest reliability [17, 19].
Responsiveness has been established in a wide variety of contexts including adverse events, increased symptoms, opportunistic infections and AIDS-defining events, initiation of ART [4, 10, 12, 18].|
Negligible effects in treatment experienced adults changing therapy .
Studies have found the MOS-HIV is more responsive than EQ-5D, HUI3 and MQOL-HIV .
|Floor and ceiling effects have been reported [19, 20].||
Well established reliability/validity and widely used but concerns that as one of the earliest HIV-specific measures to be developed it may not have continued relevance for PLWH. They question whether there is a true advantage to using the MOS-HIV over the SF-36. Would be unwise to administer alongside another MOS measure such as the SF-36 because of shared items .|
May have limited value in cross-cultural research because although the scale has been translated into many languages, it may not have sematic and conceptual equivalence outside the USA . More information is needed about performance of the scale in women, low income and other socially disadvantaged groups .
Can be administered individually or together with the EQ-5D to measure changes in HRQOL . There is a lack of items addressing sexual function and body image .
Validation data draws on a range of patient groups from asymptomatic to those with advanced HIV .
|WHOQOL-HIV BREF ||Physical, psychological, level of independence, social, environmental, and spiritual QoL||31 items||5 point likert scale||not stated||not stated||not stated||not stated||not stated||not stated|
|Symptom Quality of Life Adherence (HIV-SQUAD) ||HRQOL items include physical and psychological domains. The measure also includes symptoms and a visual analogue scale for adherence||24 items||5 point likert scales, dichotomous items and a visual analogue scale||not stated||The measure discriminated between patients at different CD4 counts and with/without hepatitis co-infection (construct validity) .||Cronbach’s alpha was acceptable for the physical component but <0.7 for the psychological component (internal consistency) ||Responsive to change in HIV viral load .||not stated||not stated|