skip to main content
Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Index

Comparison of Modes of Administration and Response Options in the Assessment of Subjective Health Using the First Question of SF-36

Mendes, Salomé ; Severo, Milton ; Lopes, Carla

Social Indicators Research, Jun 2012, pp.305-315 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

Full text available online

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Comparison of Modes of Administration and Response Options in the Assessment of Subjective Health Using the First Question of SF-36
  • Author/Creator: Mendes, Salomé ; Severo, Milton ; Lopes, Carla
  • Language: English
  • Subjects: Studies ; Social Research ; Quality of Life ; Experimental/Theoretical ; Social Trends & Culture
  • Is Part Of: Social Indicators Research, Jun 2012, pp.305-315
  • Description: To compare two modes of administration (self-administered; by interviewer) and two response options format (using words; images of "facial-expressions") of the first question of SF-36 (Q1SF-36), and to test its validity. We included 825 participants (20-90 years). Q1SF-36, using words or images, was included in a global questionnaire interview and at the end participants filled the SF-36. The agreement was tested by weighted kappa coefficients (WKappa). Classification Trees were used in the calibration of Q1SF-36 responses, with the physical (PDSF36) and mental dimensions of SF-36. Polyserial correlation coefficients and areas under the ROC curves (AUC) were used for validation. After categorization, using PDSF36 classification trees, the WKappa were 0.770 (self-administered vs. interviewer), 0.569 (self-administered vs. facial-expressions) and 0.566 (interviewer vs. facial-expressions). The WKappa between the PDSF36 and the modes (self-administered, interviewer and facial-expressions) were 0.784, 0.713 and 0.579 and the corresponding polyserial correlation coefficients were 0.784, 0.713 and 0.579. A good discriminatory power was found comparing the modes with the PDSF36 (AUC = 0.907, 0.923 and 0.827), but not with mental dimension (AUC = 0.538, 0.501 and 0.629). The Q1SF-36, by self-administration or interviewer, may be a valid alternative for assessment of subjective physical health, but not mental health.[PUBLICATION ]
  • Identifier: ISSN: 03038300 ; E-ISSN: 15730921 ; DOI: 10.1007/s11205-011-9849-y