Literature DB >> 8935473

Evidence for the sensitivity of the SF-36 health status measure to inequalities in health: results from the Oxford healthy lifestyles survey.

C Jenkinson1, R Layte, A Coulter, L Wright.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The short form 36 (SF-36) health questionnaire may not be appropriate for population surveys assessing health gain because of the low responsiveness (sensitivity to change) of domains on the measure. An hypothesised health gain of respondents in social class V to that of those in social class I indicated only marginal improvement in self reported health. Subgroup analysis, however, showed that the SF-36 would indicate dramatic changes if the health of social class V could be improved to that of social class I.
DESIGN: Postal survey using a questionnaire booklet containing the SF-36 and a number of other items concerned with lifestyles and illness. A letter outlining the purpose of the study was included.
SETTING: The sample was drawn from family health services authority (FHSA) computerised registers for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire, and Oxfordshire. SAMPLE: The questionnaire was sent to 13,042 randomly selected subjects between the ages of 17-65. Altogether 9332 (72%) responded. OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores for the eight dimensions of the SF-36. STATISTICS: The sensitivity of the SF-36 was tested by hypothesising that the scores of those in the bottom quartile of the SF-36 scores in class V could be improved to the level of the scores from the bottom quartile of SF-36 scores in class I using the effect size statistic.
RESULTS: SF-36 scores for the population at the 25th, 50th, and 75th centiles were provided. Those who reported worse health on each dimension of the SF-36 (ie in the lowest 25% of scores) differ dramatically between social class I and V. Large effect sizes were gained on all but one dimension of the SF-36 when the health of those in the bottom quartile of the SF-36 scores in class V were hypothesised to have improved to the level of the scores from the bottom quartile of SF-36 scores in class I.
CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of SF-36 data at a population level is inappropriate; subgroup analysis is more appropriate. The data suggest that if it were possible to improve the functioning and wellbeing of those in worst health in class V to those reporting the worst health in class I the improvement would be dramatic. Furthermore, differences between the classes detected by the SF-36 are substantial and more dramatic than might previously have been imagined.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8935473      PMCID: PMC1060298          DOI: 10.1136/jech.50.3.377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  17 in total

Review 1.  The Black report on socioeconomic inequalities in health 10 years on.

Authors:  G D Smith; M Bartley; D Blane
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990 Aug 18-25

2.  The Nottingham health profile: a useful tool for epidemiologists?

Authors:  P Kind; R Carr-Hill
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists.

Authors:  S M Hunt; J McEwen; S P McKenna
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1985-04

4.  Measuring health status with the SF-36: the need for regional norms.

Authors:  R A Lyons; H Fielder; B N Littlepage
Journal:  J Public Health Med       Date:  1995-03

Review 5.  Assessing the need for health status measures.

Authors:  J L Donovan; S J Frankel; J D Eyles
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.710

6.  Measuring health changes among severely ill patients. The floor phenomenon.

Authors:  A B Bindman; D Keane; N Lurie
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  The 'iceberg' of illness and 'trivial' consultations.

Authors:  D R Hannay
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1980-09

8.  Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care.

Authors:  J E Brazier; R Harper; N M Jones; A O'Cathain; K J Thomas; T Usherwood; L Westlake
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-07-18

9.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs.

Authors:  C A McHorney; J E Ware; A E Raczek
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.

Authors:  L E Kazis; J J Anderson; R F Meenan
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  14 in total

1.  How much does self-reported health status, measured by the SF-36, vary between electoral wards with different Jarman and Townsend scores?

Authors:  P Marsh; R Carlisle; A J Avery
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Association between educational level and health related quality of life in Spanish adults.

Authors:  E Regidor; G Barrio; L de la Fuente; A Domingo; C Rodriguez; J Alonso
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Development of a disease specific health related quality of life measure for adults and adolescents with cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  L Gee; J Abbott; S P Conway; C Etherington; A K Webb
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 9.139

4.  Lack of benefit of a primary care-based nurse-led education programme for people with osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  Christina R Victor; Eric Triggs; Fiona Ross; Joanne Lord; John S Axford
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2005-06-04       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Assessing the impact of behavioral risk factors and known-groups validity of the SF-12 in a US Chinese immigrant population.

Authors:  Dorothy Y Hung; Erica I Lubetkin; Marianne C Fahs; Donna R Shelley
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Comprehensibility of measures of health-related quality of life in minority and low-income patients.

Authors:  Erica I Lubetkin; Marthe R Gold
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 1.798

7.  Psychometric evaluation of the SF-36 (v.2) questionnaire in a probability sample of Brazilian households: results of the survey Pesquisa Dimensões Sociais das Desigualdades (PDSD), Brazil, 2008.

Authors:  Josué Laguardia; Monica R Campos; Claudia M Travassos; Alberto L Najar; Luiz A Anjos; Miguel M Vasconcellos
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Psychometric properties of the Nurses Work Functioning Questionnaire (NWFQ).

Authors:  Fania R Gärtner; Karen Nieuwenhuijsen; Frank J H van Dijk; Judith K Sluiter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Statistical significant change versus relevant or important change in (quasi) experimental design: some conceptual and methodological problems in estimating magnitude of intervention-related change in health services research.

Authors:  Berrie Middel; Eric van Sonderen
Journal:  Int J Integr Care       Date:  2002-12-17       Impact factor: 5.120

10.  Health related quality of life in patients with chronic gastritis and peptic ulcer and factors with impact: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Zhengwei Wen; Xiaomei Li; Qian Lu; Julie Brunson; Miao Zhao; Jianfeng Tan; Chonghua Wan; Pingguang Lei
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.