nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

01.03.2010

Deriving SF-12v2 physical and mental health summary scores: a comparison of different scoring algorithms

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 2/2010

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Summary scores for the SF-12, version 2 (SF-12v2) health status measure are based on scoring coefficients derived for version 1 of the SF-36, despite changes in item wording and response scales and despite the fact that SF-12 scales only contain a subset of SF-36 items. This study derives new summary scores based directly on SF-12v2 data from a recent U.S. sample and compares the new summary scores to the standard ones. Due to controversy regarding methods for developing scoring coefficients for the summary score, we compare summary scores produced by different methods.

Methods

We analyzed nationally representative U.S. data, which provided 53,399 observations for the SF-12v2 in 2003–2005. In addition to the standard SF-12V2 scoring algorithm, summary scores were generated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), principal components analysis (PCA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), with orthogonal and oblique rotation. We examined correlations among different summary scores, their associations with demographic and clinical variables, and the consistency between changes in scale scores and in summary scores over time.

Results

The 8 scale means in the current data were similar to the 1998 SF-12v2 means, with the exception of the vitality scale. Correlations among the scales based on SF-12v2 data differed slightly from correlations derived from scales based on the SF-36 data. Correlations among summary scores derived using different methods were high (≥0.84). However, changes in summary scores derived using orthogonal rotation of components or factors were not consistent with changes in sub-scales, whereas changes in summary scores derived using oblique rotation were more consistent with patterns of change in sub-scales.

Conclusions

Although the basic structure of the SF-12 is stable, summary scores derived from oblique rotation are preferable and more consistent with changes in individual scales. On empirical and conceptual grounds, we suggest using summary scores based on oblique CFA.

Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form Health Survey (SF-36): I conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.CrossRefPubMed

Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-item short-form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34, 220–233.CrossRefPubMed

Ware, J. E., Jr., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A user’s manual. Boston, MA: The Health Assessment Lab, New England Medical Center.

Ware, J. E., Jr., Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D. M., & Gandek, B. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-12 Health Survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.

Ware, J. E., Jr., Kosinski, M., Bjorner, J. B., Turner-Bowker, D. M., et al. (2007). Users manual for the SF-36v2 ^tm Health Survey (2nd ed.). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Inc.

Jayasinghe, U. W., Proudofoot, J., Barton, C. A., Amoroso, C., et al. (2009). Quality of life of Australian chronically-ill adults: Patient and practice characteristics matter. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7, 50.CrossRefPubMed

Amir, M., Lewin-Epstein, N., Becler, G., & Buskila, D. (2002). Psychometric properties of the SF-12 (Hebrew version) in a primary care population in Israel. Medical Care, 40, 918–928.CrossRefPubMed

Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Niakis, D., & Tountas, Y. (2007). Validity of SF-12 summary scores in a Greek general population. Health and Quality of Life, 5, 55.CrossRef

Gandhi, S. K., Salmon, J. W., Zhao, S. Z., Lambert, B. L., et al. (2001). Psychometric evaluation of the 12-item short form Health Survey (SF-12) in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Clinical Therapeutics, 23, 1080–1098.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Montazeri, A., Vahdaninia, M., Mousavi, S. J., & Omidvari, O. (2009). The Iranian version of 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12): Factor structure, internal consistency and construct validity. BMC Public Health, 9, 341.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Maurischat, C., Herschbach, P., Peters, A., & Bullinger, M. (2008). Factorial validity of the short-form 12 (SF-12) in patients with diabetes mellitus. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 7–20.

12.

Preacher, K. J., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s electric factor analysis machine. Understanding Statistics, 2(1), 13–43.CrossRef

13.

Velicer, W. F., & Jackson, D. N. (1990). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some issues in selecting an appropriate procedure. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(1), 1–28.CrossRef

14.

Widaman, K. F. (1993). Common factor analysis versus principal component analysis: Differential bias in representing model parameters? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28(3), 263–311.CrossRef

15.

Simon, G. E., Revicki, D. A., Grothaus, L., & Vonkorff, M. (1998). SF-36 summary scores: Are physical and mental health truly distinct? Medical Care, 36(4), 567–572.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Taft, C., Karlsson, J., & Sullivan, M. (2001). Do SF-36 summary component scores accurately summarize subscale scores? Quality of Life Research, 10(5), 395–404.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Farivar, S., Cunningham, W., & Hays, R. (2007). Correlated physical and mental health summary scores for the SF-36 and SF-12 Health Survey. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, 54.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Anagnostopoulos, F., Niakas, D., & Tountas, Y. (2009). Comparison between exploratory factor-analytic and SEM-based approaches to constructing SF-36 summary scores. Quality of Life Research, 18, 53–63.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Wilson, D., Parsons, J., & Tucker, G. (2000). The SF-36 summary scales: Problems and solutions. Sozial- und Praeventivmedizin, 45, 239–246.CrossRef

20.

Hann, M., & Reeves, D. (2008). The SF-36 scales are not accurately summarized by independent physical and mental component scores. Quality of Life Research, 17, 413–423.CrossRefPubMed

21.

AHRQ PUF Data Files. MEPS HC-087: 2004 Medical Conditions. Rockville MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, November, 2006. Available at http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/download_data/pufs/h87/h87doc.pdf. Accessed on May 1, 2009.

22.

Elixhauser, A., Steiner, C. A., Whittington, C. A., & McCarthy, E. (2000). Clinical classifications for health policy research: Hospital inpatient statistics, 1995. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, HCUP-3 Research Note. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ PUB 98-0049.

23.

Cunningham, W. E., Nakazono, T. T., Tsai, K. L., & Hays, R. D. (2003). Do differences in methods for constructing the SF-36 physical and mental health summary measures change their associations with chronic medical conditions and utilization? Quality of Life Research, 12, 1029–1035.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Hays, R. D., & Morales, L. S. (2001). The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Annals of Medicine, 33, 350–357.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Ware, J. E., & Kosinski, M. (2001). Interpreting SF-36 summary health measures: A response. Quality of Life Research, 10(5), 405–413.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Schmitz, N., & Kuse, J. (2007). The SF-36 summary scores and their relation to mental disorders: Physical functioning may affect performance of the summary scores. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 163–170.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1990). On the equivalence of factors and components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(91), 67–74.CrossRef

28.

Mols, F., Pelle, A. J., & Kupper, N. (2009). Normative data of the SF-12 Health Survey with validation using postmyocardial infarction patients in the Dutch population. Quality of Life Research, 18, 403–414.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., Maccallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299.CrossRef

30.

Cheak-Zamora, N. C., Wyrwich, K. W., & McBride, T. D. (2009). Reliability and validity of the SF-12v2 in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Quality of Life Research, 18(6), 727–735.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Selim, A. J., Rogers, W., Fleishman, J. A., Qian, S. X., Fincke, B. G., Rothendler, J. A., et al. (2009). Updated U.S. population standard for the veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 43–52.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Ware, J. E., Jr, Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., & Gandek, B. (1993). SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute.

Titel: Deriving SF-12v2 physical and mental health summary scores: a comparison of different scoring algorithms
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2010
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 2/2010
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9582-z

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2010

Health-related quality of life among paediatric survivors of primary brain tumours and acute leukaemia

Cross-national comparability of the WHOQOL-BREF: A measurement invariance approach

Somatically ill persons’ self-nominated quality of life domains: review of the literature and guidelines for future studies

Perceived social support, hope, and quality of life of persons living with HIV/AIDS: a case study from Nepal

Psychometric evaluation of the impact of cancer (IOC-CS) scale for young adult survivors of childhood cancer

Communicating about the experience of pain and fatigue in disability