Literature DB >> 10528952

Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey questionnaire: which normative data should be used? Comparisons between the norms provided by the Omnibus Survey in Britain, the Health Survey for England and the Oxford Healthy Life Survey.

A Bowling1, M Bond, C Jenkinson, D L Lamping.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Population norms for the attributes included in measurement scales are required to provide a standard with which scores from other study populations can be compared. This study aimed to obtain population norms for the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire, derived from a random sample of the population in Britain who were interviewed at home, and to make comparisons with other commonly used norms.
METHODS: The method was a face-to-face interview survey of a random sample of 2056 adults living at home in Britain (response rate 78 per cent). Comparisons of the SF-36 scores derived from this sample were made with the Health Survey for England and the Oxford Healthy Life Survey.
RESULTS: Controlling for age and sex, many of mean scores on the SF-36 dimensions differed between the three datasets. The British interview sample had better total means for Physical Functioning, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Energy/Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The Health (interview) Survey for England had the lowest (worst) total mean scores for Physical Functioning, Social Functioning, Role Limitations (physical), Bodily Pain, and Health Perceptions. The postal sample in central England had the lowest (worst) total mean scores for Role Limitations (emotional), Mental Health and Energy/Vitality.
CONCLUSION: Responses obtained from interview methods may suffer more from social desirability bias (resulting in inflated SF-36 scores) than postal surveys. Differences in SF-36 means between surveys are also likely to reflect question order and contextual effects of the questionnaires. This indicates the importance of providing mode-specific population norms for the various methods of questionnaire administration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10528952     DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/21.3.255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Public Health Med        ISSN: 0957-4832


  65 in total

Review 1.  Measuring the health status burden in hemodialysis patients using the SF-36® health survey.

Authors:  Aaron S Yarlas; Michelle K White; Min Yang; Renee N Saris-Baglama; Peter Galthen Bech; Torsten Christensen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Methodological challenges in assessing general population reactions in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack.

Authors:  G James Rubin; Richard Amlôt; Lisa Page; Simon Wessely
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.035

3.  Changes in levels of parental distress after their child with atypical genitalia undergoes genitoplasty.

Authors:  Cortney Wolfe-Christensen; Amy B Wisniewski; Alexandria J Mullins; Kristy J Reyes; Paul Austin; Laurence Baskin; Kerlly Bernabé; Earl Cheng; Allyson Fried; Dominic Frimberger; Denise Galan; Lynette Gonzalez; Saul Greenfield; Thomas Kolon; Bradley Kropp; Yegappan Lakshmanan; Sabrina Meyer; Theresa Meyer; Natalie J Nokoff; Blake Palmer; Dix Poppas; Alethea Paradis; Elizabeth Yerkes; Larry L Mullins
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 1.830

4.  Intimate partner violence and health-related quality of life in European men and women: findings from the DOVE study.

Authors:  Diogo Costa; Eleni Hatzidimitriadou; Elli Ioannidi-Kapolou; Jutta Lindert; Joaquim Soares; Örjan Sundin; Olga Toth; Henrique Barros
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-07-26       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Associations between objectively assessed physical activity levels and fitness and self-reported health-related quality of life in community-dwelling older adults.

Authors:  Flávia A C Wanderley; Gustavo Silva; Elisa Marques; José Oliveira; Jorge Mota; Joana Carvalho
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-03-06       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Mode of administration bias.

Authors:  Chad Cook
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-06

7.  Population-based normative values for the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index and the Australian/Canadian (AUSCAN) hand osteoarthritis index functional subscales.

Authors:  Nicholas Bellamy; C Wilson; J Hendrikz
Journal:  Inflammopharmacology       Date:  2009-12-19       Impact factor: 4.473

Review 8.  Effect on quality of life of continuous positive airway pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jiyong Jing; Tiancha Huang; Wei Cui; Huahao Shen
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2008-03-14       Impact factor: 2.584

Review 9.  Sex and Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Authors:  Ennio Giulio Favalli; Martina Biggioggero; Chiara Crotti; Andrea Becciolini; Maria Gabriella Raimondo; Pier Luigi Meroni
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 8.667

10.  Women, men, and rheumatoid arthritis: analyses of disease activity, disease characteristics, and treatments in the QUEST-RA study.

Authors:  Tuulikki Sokka; Sergio Toloza; Maurizio Cutolo; Hannu Kautiainen; Heidi Makinen; Feride Gogus; Vlado Skakic; Humeira Badsha; Tõnu Peets; Asta Baranauskaite; Pál Géher; Ilona Ujfalussy; Fotini N Skopouli; Maria Mavrommati; Rieke Alten; Christof Pohl; Jean Sibilia; Andrea Stancati; Fausto Salaffi; Wojciech Romanowski; Danuta Zarowny-Wierzbinska; Dan Henrohn; Barry Bresnihan; Patricia Minnock; Lene Surland Knudsen; Johannes Wg Jacobs; Jaime Calvo-Alen; Juris Lazovskis; Geraldo da Rocha Castelar Pinheiro; Dmitry Karateev; Daina Andersone; Sylejman Rexhepi; Yusuf Yazici; Theodore Pincus
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2009-01-14       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.