Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Quality of Life Research
Erschienen in:

23.03.2020

Do response styles affect the predictive validity of self-rated health among Chinese older men and women?

verfasst von: Qiong Wu, Peikang Zhang

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 8/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

This study intended to examine whether correcting for response styles of the widely used self-rated health (SRH) question would affect its predictive validity in estimating respondents’ mortality risks.

Methods

We used data on a sample of 3319 men and 3250 women aged 60 and above from a nationally representative survey in China. Response styles were estimated with both ratings on two health anchoring vignettes and self-rated items in domains unrelated to health. Gender-stratified logistic regressions were used to estimate the effects of SRH on 4-year mortality risks. We compared the results before and after adjusting for response styles.

Results

In the unconditional model, the effects of the five-point SRH on 4-year mortality risks were significant in both older women and men, and stronger among Chinese older men based on discrete change in probabilities of mortality at means. Gender difference was observed in response styles. Men assigned lower ratings to the vignettes than women, reflecting their higher standards in defining good health. Women presented higher proportions of extreme responses and lower proportions of midpoint responses. Correcting for response styles had no effect on the predictive validity of SRH for Chinese older men, but had some positive effects for Chinese older women when no other covariates were included.

Conclusion

Adjusting for response styles contributed to a small improvement in predicting mortality risks only among Chinese older women under restricted conditions, but not men.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Bamia, C., Orfanos, P., Juerges, H., Schöttker, B., Brenner, H., Lorbeer, R., et al. (2017). Self-rated health and all-cause and cause-specific mortality of older adults: Individual data meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies in the CHANCES Consortium. Maturitas,103, 37–44.PubMedCrossRef
2.
DeSalvo, K. B., Bloser, N., Reynolds, K., He, J., & Muntner, P. (2006). Mortality prediction with a single general self-rated health question. Journal of General Internal Medicine,21(3), 267–275.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Idler, E. L., & Benyamini, Y. (1997). Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,38(1), 21–37.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Assari, S. (2016). Gender differences in the predictive role of self-rated health on short-term risk of mortality among older adults. SAGE Open Medicine,4, 2050312116666975.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Stenholm, S., Kivimäki, M., Jylhä, M., Kawachi, I., Westerlund, H., Pentti, J., et al. (2016). Trajectories of self-rated health in the last 15 years of life by cause of death. European Journal of Epidemiology,31(2), 177–185.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Benyamini, Y. (2011). Why does self-rated health predict mortality? An update on current knowledge and a research agenda for psychologists. Psychology & Health,26(11), 1407–1413.CrossRef
7.
Bopp, M., Braun, J., Gutzwiller, F., Faeh, D., & Swiss National Cohort Study Group. (2012). Health risk or resource? Gradual and independent association between self-rated health and mortality persists over 30 years. PLoS ONE,7(2), e30795.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Hu, Y.-N., Chen, P.-C., Hsu, C.-C., Yu, H.-K., Chien, K.-L., Li, C.-C., et al. (2016). Age and gender differences in the relationship between self-rated health and mortality among middle-aged and elderly people in Taiwan—Results of a national cohort study. International Journal of Gerontology,10(2), 91–95.CrossRef
9.
Moreno, X., Albala, C., Lera, L., Sánchez, H., Fuentes-García, A., & Dangour, A. D. (2017). The role of gender in the association between self-rated health and mortality among older adults in Santiago, Chile: A cohort study. PLoS ONE,12(7), e0181317.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Benyamini, Y., Blumstein, T., Lusky, A., & Modan, B. (2003). Gender differences in the self-rated health-mortality association: Is it poor self-rated health that predicts mortality or excellent self-rated health that predicts survival? Gerontologist,43(3), 396–405.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Jürges, H. (2007). True health vs response styles: Exploring cross-country differences in self-reported health. Health Economics,16(2), 163–178.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Paulhus, D. L. Measurement and control of response bias (1991).
13.
Wetzel, E., Lüdtke, O., Zettler, I., & Böhnke, J. R. (2016). The stability of extreme response style and acquiescence over 8 years. Assessment,23(3), 279–291.PubMedCrossRef
14.
King, G., & Wand, J. (2007). Comparing incomparable survey responses: Evaluating and selecting anchoring vignettes. Political Analysis,15(1), 46–66.CrossRef
15.
Schneider, S. (2016). Extracting response style bias from measures of positive and negative affect in aging research. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B,73(1), 64–74.
16.
Bolt, D. M., & Newton, J. R. (2011). Multiscale measurement of extreme response style. Educational and Psychological Measurement,71(5), 814–833.CrossRef
17.
Datta Gupta, N., Kristensen, N., & Pozzoli, D. (2010). External validation of the use of vignettes in cross-country health studies. Economic Modelling,27(4), 854–865.CrossRef
18.
Wu, Q. (2016). Subjective cognitive impairment of older adults: A comparison between the US and China. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research,25(1), 68–75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
19.
Hanandita, W., & Tampubolon, G. (2016). Does reporting behaviour bias the measurement of social inequalities in self-rated health in Indonesia? An anchoring vignette analysis. Quality Life Research,25(5), 1137–1149.CrossRef
20.
Weijters, B., Cabooter, E., & Schillewaert, N. (2010). The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing,27(3), 236–247.CrossRef
21.
Kieruj, N. D., & Moors, G. (2013). Response style behavior: Question format dependent or personal style? Quality & Quantity,47(1), 193–211.CrossRef
22.
Wetzel, E., Carstensen, C. H., & Böhnke, J. R. (2013). Consistency of extreme response style and non-extreme response style across traits. Journal of Research in Personality,47(2), 178–189.CrossRef
23.
Bolt, D. M., Lu, Y., & Kim, J.-S. (2014). Measurement and control of response styles using anchoring vignettes: A model-based approach. Psychological Methods,19(4), 528–541.PubMedCrossRef
24.
King, G., Murray, C. J. L., Salomon, J. A., & Tandon, A. (2004). Enhancing the validity and cross-cultural comparability of measurement in survey research. American Political Science Review,98(1), 191–207.CrossRef
25.
Chevalier, A., & Fielding, A. (2011). An introduction to anchoring vignettes. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,174, 569–574.CrossRef
26.
Peracchi, F., & Rossetti, C. (2012). Heterogeneity in health responses and anchoring vignettes. Empir Econ,42(2), 513–538.CrossRef
27.
Jonas, K. G., & Markon, K. E. (2019). Modeling response style using vignettes and person-specific item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement,43(1), 3–17.PubMedCrossRef
28.
He, J., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2013). A general response style factor: Evidence from a multi-ethnic study in the Netherlands. Personality and Individual Differences,55(7), 794–800.CrossRef
29.
Institute of Social Science Survey, P. U. (2019). China Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Peking University Open Research Data Platform, City.
30.
Xie, Y., Zhang, X., Tu, P., Ren, Q., Sun, Y., Lv, P., Ding, H., Hu, J. and Wu, Q. China Family Panel Studies: User's Manual. 2017.
31.
32.
Cheng, S.-T., & Chan, A. C. M. (2005). The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in older Chinese: Thresholds for long and short forms. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry,20(5), 465–470.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Tang, Z., Wang, H.-X., Meng, C., Wu, X.-G., Ericsson, K., Winblad, B., et al. (1999). The prevalence of functional disability in activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living among elderly Beijing Chinese. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics,29(2), 115–125.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Wand, J., King, G., & Lau, O. (2011). Anchors: Software for anchoing vignette data. Journal of Statistical Software,42, 3.CrossRef
35.
Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review,26(1), 67–82.CrossRef
36.
37.
Weuve, J., Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J., Glymour, M. M., Beck, T. L., Aggarwal, N. T., Wilson, R. S., et al. (2012). Accounting for bias due to selective attrition: The example of smoking and cognitive decline. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.),23(1), 119–128.CrossRef
38.
He, J., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Espinosa, A. D., & Mui, P. H. C. (2014). Toward a unification of acquiescent, extreme, and midpoint response styles: A multilevel study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,14(3), 306–322.CrossRef
39.
Hibbing, M. V., Cawvey, M., Deol, R., Bloeser, A. J., & Mondak, J. J. (2019). The relationship between personality and response patterns on public opinion surveys: The big five, extreme response style, and acquiescence response style. International Journal of Public Opinion Research,31(1), 161–177.CrossRef
40.
Jokela, M., Batty, G. D., Nyberg, S. T., Virtanen, M., Nabi, H., Singh-Manoux, A., et al. (2013). Personality and all-cause mortality: individual-participant meta-analysis of 3,947 deaths in 76,150 adults. American Journal of Epidemiology,178(5), 667–675.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Hopkins, D. J., & King, G. (2010). Improving anchoring vignettes: designing surveys to correct interpersonal incomparability. Public Opinion Quarterly,74(2), 201–222.CrossRef
42.
Singh-Manoux, A., Martikainen, P., Ferrie, J., Zins, M., Marmot, M., & Goldberg, M. (2006). What does self rated health measure? Results from the British Whitehall II and French Gazel cohort studies. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health,60(4), 364–372.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Do response styles affect the predictive validity of self-rated health among Chinese older men and women?
verfasst von
Qiong Wu
Peikang Zhang
Publikationsdatum
23.03.2020
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 8/2020
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02484-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2020

The impact of metabolic syndrome on mental health-related quality of life and depressive symptoms

Relationship between chronic diseases and sleep duration among older adults in Ghana

Long-term health-related quality of life after surgery in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

Correction to: Mixed methods analysis of Health-Related Quality of Life in ambulant individuals affected with RYR1-related myopathies pre-post-N-acetylcysteine therapy

  • Correction

Minimal important change in physical function in trauma patients: a study using the short musculoskeletal function assessment

  • Open Access

Development and content validation of a questionnaire measuring patient empowerment in cancer follow-up