This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Shmueli, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shmueli, A. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Subjective Health Status and Health Values in the General Population

Objective. To explore the relationship between rating-scale evaluation of health-related quality of life ("health value") and two subjective evaluations of health: the SF-36 profile and the five-category perception of general health (excellent, very good, good, fair, and poor). Methods. This relationship was explored by linear and nonlinear regression analysis of data obtained through face-to-face interviews with a sample of 2,030 per sons aged 45-75 years representing the Israeli Jewish urban population in that age group. Results. The main outcome is a mapping assigning health values to the sub jective health-status scores, e.g., "good" general health is equivalent to a health value of 76-81, depending on the functional form of the relation. "Poor" health is equivalent to a value of 45-61. The R² is about 0.3. While the eight scales of the SF-36 were found to be linearly related to health value (R² = 0.51), the two summary measures— physical component scale (PCS) and mental component scale (MCS)—were not. The scales measuring general health, vitality, and physical functioning were the main de terminants of health value, while the role-performance scales were insignificant. The PCS had a larger effect than the MCS. Discussion. These relationships provide deeper insight into the structure and meaning of the two health-status measures in the general population. They also place earlier determinations of these relationships among sick persons in a broader context and raise several further questions regarding the rela tionship between health values and health status. Key words: rating scale; health- related quality of life; health value; MOS SF-36; subjective evaluation of health; Box- Cox regression. (Med Decis Making 1999;19:122-127)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 19, No. 2, 122-127 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900202


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. M. Gray, O. Rivero-Arias, and P. M. Clarke Estimating the Association between SF-12 Responses and EQ-5D Utility Values by Response Mapping Med Decis Making, January 1, 2006; 26(1): 18 - 29. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Franks, E. I. Lubetkin, M. R. Gold, D. J. Tancredi, and H. Jia Mapping the SF-12 to the EuroQol EQ-5D Index in a National US Sample Med Decis Making, June 1, 2004; 24(3): 247 - 254. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. F. Lawrence and J. A. Fleishman Predicting EuroQoL EQ-5D Preference Scores from the SF-12 Health Survey in a Nationally Representative Sample Med Decis Making, March 1, 2004; 24(2): 160 - 169. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Shmueli The Relationship between the Visual Analog Scale and the SF-36 Scales in the General Population: An Update Med Decis Making, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 61 - 63. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. A. Lee, W. Hollingworth, and S. D. Sullivan Comparison of Directly Elicited Preferences to Preferences Derived from the SF-36 in Adults with Asthma Med Decis Making, July 1, 2003; 23(4): 323 - 334. [Abstract] [PDF]