Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Quality of Life Research
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research 6/2013

01.08.2013 | Original Paper

Monitoring population health for Healthy People 2020: evaluation of the NIH PROMIS® Global Health, CDC Healthy Days, and satisfaction with life instruments

verfasst von: John P. Barile, Bryce B. Reeve, Ashley Wilder Smith, Matthew M. Zack, Sandra A. Mitchell, Rosemarie Kobau, David F. Cella, Cecily Luncheon, William W. Thompson

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 6/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

Healthy People 2020 identified health-related quality of life and well-being (WB) as indicators of population health for the next decade. This study examined the measurement properties of the NIH PROMIS® Global Health Scale, the CDC Healthy Days items, and associations with the Satisfaction with Life Scale.

Methods

A total of 4,184 adults completed the Porter Novelli’s HealthStyles mailed survey. Physical and mental health (9 items from PROMIS Global Scale and 3 items from CDC Healthy days measure), and 4 WB factor items were tested for measurement equivalence using multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis.

Results

The CDC items accounted for similar variance as the PROMIS items on physical and mental health factors; both factors were moderately correlated with WB. Measurement invariance was supported across gender and age; the magnitude of some factor loadings differed between those with and without a chronic medical condition.

Conclusions

The PROMIS, CDC, and WB items all performed well. The PROMIS items captured a broad range of functioning across the entire continuum of physical and mental health, while the CDC items appear appropriate for assessing burden of disease for chronic conditions and are brief and easily interpretable. All three measures under study appear to be appropriate measures for monitoring several aspects of the Healthy People 2020 goals and objectives.
Vorheriger Artikel Biological pathways and genetic mechanisms involved in social functioning
Nächster Artikel Health-related quality of life in relation to walking habits and fitness: a population-based study of 75-year-olds

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
US Department of Health and Human Services. (2011). Foundation health measures. Healthy People 2020. Retrieved July 5, 2011.
2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000). Measuring Healthy Days. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
3.
Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K. L., & Cella, D. (2009). Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 873–880.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Moriarty, D. G., Kobau, R., Zack, M. M., & Zahran, H. S. (2005). Tracking Healthy Days—A window on the health of older adults. Preventing Chronic Disease, 2(3), A16.PubMed
6.
Fayers, P. M., & Machin, D. (2007). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Chichester: Wiley.
7.
National Center for Health Statistics. (1994). In Proceedings of the 1993 NCHS conference on the cognitive aspects of self-reported health status. Unpublished manuscript.
8.
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (1993). Consultation on functional status surveillance for states and communities: Decatur, Georgia, June 4–5, 1992: Meeting report. US Dept. of Health & Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
9.
Booske, B. C., Kindig, D. A., Remington, P. L., Kempf, A. M., & Peppard, P. E. (2006). How should we measure health-related quality of life in Wisconsin? University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute Brief Report (Vol. 1). University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute.
10.
Moriarty, D. G., Zack, M. M., & Kobau, R. (2003). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Healthy Days measures—Population tracking of perceived physical and mental health over time. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 1, 37.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Jiang, Y., & Hesser, J. E. (2009). Using item response theory to analyze the relationship between health-related quality of life and health risk factors. Preventing Chronic Disease, 6(1), 1–10.
12.
Mielenz, T., Jackson, E., Currey, S., DeVellis, R., & Callahan, L. F. (2006). Psychometric properties of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Health-related quality of life (CDC HRQOL) items in adults with arthritis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 66–84.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Horner-Johnson, W., Suzuki, R., Krahn, G., Andresen, E., Drum, C., & The RRTC Expert Panel on Health. (2010). Structure of health-related quality of life among people with and without functional limitations. Quality of Life Research, 19(7), 977–984.
14.
Parrish, R. G. (2010). Measuring population health outcomes. Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice, and Policy, 7(4), 1–11.
15.
Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1179–1194.PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 402–435.CrossRef
18.
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans’ perceptions of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef
19.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Bann, C. M., Kobau, R., Lewis, M. A., Zack, M. M., Luncheon, C., & Thompson, W. W. (2011). Development and psychometric evaluation of the public health surveillance well-being scale. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 1031–1043.
22.
Porter Novelli International. (2010). HealthStyles survey. Washington, DC: Porter Novelli.
23.
Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 149–161.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Blais, M. R., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Brière, N. M. (1989). L’échelle de satisfaction de vie: Validation canadienne-française du” Satisfaction with Life Scale”. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 21(2), 210–223.CrossRef
25.
Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(5), 1046–1053.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Pavot, W. (2008). The assessment of subjective well-being. New York: The Guilford Press.
27.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 137–152.CrossRef
28.
Larsen, R. J., & Eid, M. (2008). Ed Diener and the science of subjective well-being. New York: The Guilford Press.
29.
Kobau, R., Sniezek, J., Zack, M. M., Lucas, R. E., & Burns, A. (2010). Well-being assessment: An evaluation of well-being scales for public health and population estimates of well-being among US adults. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 2, 272–297.CrossRef
30.
Diener, E. (2009). The science of well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener. New York: Springer.CrossRef
31.
Muthen, B. O., & Muthen, L. K. (2010). Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables (Version 6.0). Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
32.
Flora, D., & Curran, P. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRef
35.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods Research, 21, 230–258.CrossRef
36.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
37.
Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S78–S94.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Toward a further understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 5(2), 139–158.CrossRef
39.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.CrossRef
40.
Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) Analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53–76.CrossRef
41.
Gandek, B., Ware, J. E., Jr, Aaronson, N. K., Alonso, J., Apolone, G., Bjorner, J., et al. (1998). Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International quality of life assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51(11), 1149–1158.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Albrecht, G. L., & Devlieger, P. J. (1999). The disability paradox: High quality of life against all odds. Social Science and Medicine, 48(8), 977–988.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Krahn, G., Fujiura, G., Drum, C., Cardinal, B., Nosek, M., & RRTC Expert Panel on Health Measurement. (2009). The dilemma of measuring perceived health status in the context of disability. Disability and Health Journal, 2(2), 49–56.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Schwartz, C. E., Andresen, E. M., Nosek, M. A., & Krahn, G. L. (2007). Response shift theory: Important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88(4), 529–536.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Rothrock, N., Hays, R., Spritzer, K., Yount, S., Riley, W., & Cella, D. (2010). Relative to the general US population, chronic diseases are associated with poorer health-related quality of life as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
46.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2010). Multiple chronic conditions—A strategic framework: Optimum health and quality of life for individuals with multiple chronic conditions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
47.
Boyd, C. M., & Fortin, M. (2010). Future of multimorbidity research: How should understanding of multimorbidity inform health system design? Public Health Reviews, 32(2), 451–474.
Metadaten
Titel
Monitoring population health for Healthy People 2020: evaluation of the NIH PROMIS® Global Health, CDC Healthy Days, and satisfaction with life instruments
verfasst von
John P. Barile
Bryce B. Reeve
Ashley Wilder Smith
Matthew M. Zack
Sandra A. Mitchell
Rosemarie Kobau
David F. Cella
Cecily Luncheon
William W. Thompson
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2013
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 6/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0246-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2013

Quality of Life Research 6/2013 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Self-reported medical morbidity among informal caregivers of chronic illness: the case of cancer

OriginalPaper

Superselective α-adrenergic blockers versus transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective comparison of health-related quality of life outcome after treating patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

Review

Biological pathways and genetic mechanisms involved in social functioning

OriginalPaper

Pain and other symptoms and their relationship to quality of life in cancer patients on opioids

Brief Communication

Health-related quality of life and supportive care in patients with rare long-term neurological conditions

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life in the aftermath of child maltreatment: follow-up study of a hospital sample

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise