Literature DB >> 9544596

SF-36 summary scores: are physical and mental health truly distinct?

G E Simon1, D A Revicki, L Grothaus, M Vonkorff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Data from 536 primary care patients initiating antidepressant treatment were used to examine the performance of the Medical Outcomes Study SF-36 Physical Component and Mental Component summary scores.
METHODS: The SF-36 was administered at baseline and readministered after 1 month and 3 months (n = 482).
RESULTS: At the baseline assessment, patients reported modest impairment on the Physical Function, Role--Physical, Bodily Pain, and General Health Perceptions subscales (0.10 to 0.68 standard deviations below national norms), but the Physical Component summary (mean = 51) indicated no impairment based on a population norm of 50. During 3 months of follow-up evaluation, the Physical Function, Role--Physical, Bodily Pain, and General Health Perceptions subscales all showed moderate and statistically significant improvement (range from 0.28 to 0.49 standard deviation units), whereas the Physical Component summary score was essentially unchanged (mean = 50 at both 1-month and 3-month assessments). This pattern of results is a natural consequence of the assumptions and methods used to calculate these summary scores-orthogonal factor rotation and negative scoring coefficients.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest caution in the interpretation of Mental Component Summary and Physical Component Summary scores when the condition or treatment of interest has strong effects on scales with negative scoring coefficients (Mental Health and Role--Emotional for the Physical Component; Physical Function, Role--Physical, and Bodily Pain for the Mental Component).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9544596     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199804000-00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  74 in total

1.  Do SF-36 summary component scores accurately summarize subscale scores?

Authors:  C Taft; J Karlsson; M Sullivan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Do differences in methods for constructing SF-36 physical and mental health summary measures change their associations with chronic medical conditions and utilization?

Authors:  William E Cunningham; Terry T Nakazono; Kai Li Tsai; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Rethinking and rescoring the SF-12.

Authors:  David Wilson; Graeme Tucker; Catherine Chittleborough
Journal:  Soz Praventivmed       Date:  2002

4.  Performance of the RAND-12 and SF-12 summary scores in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Johnson; Sheri L Maddigan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Using the effect size to model change in preference values from descriptive health status.

Authors:  Kristy Sanderson; Gavin Andrews; Justine Corry; Helen Lapsley
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  New Australian population scoring coefficients for the old version of the SF-36 and SF-12 health status questionnaires.

Authors:  Graeme Tucker; Robert Adams; David Wilson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  The case for using country-specific scoring coefficients for scoring the SF-12, with scoring implications for the SF-36.

Authors:  Graeme Tucker; Robert Adams; David Wilson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Change in quality of life of people with stroke over time: true change or response shift?

Authors:  Sara Ahmed; Nancy E Mayo; Marc Corbiere; Sharon Wood-Dauphinee; James Hanley; Robin Cohen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Depression and comorbid illness in elderly primary care patients: impact on multiple domains of health status and well-being.

Authors:  Polly Hitchcock Noël; John W Williams; Jürgen Unützer; Jason Worchel; Shuko Lee; John Cornell; Wayne Katon; Linda H Harpole; Enid Hunkeler
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

10.  A randomized trial of medical care management for community mental health settings: the Primary Care Access, Referral, and Evaluation (PCARE) study.

Authors:  Benjamin G Druss; Silke A von Esenwein; Michael T Compton; Kimberly J Rask; Liping Zhao; Ruth M Parker
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 18.112

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.