An empirical analysis of the dimensions of health status measures
The objective of this study is to verify empirically the existence of separate dimensions in the overall concept of health status by analysing 10 variables included in a questionnaire that was applied to all adults in a simple random sample of households in St John's, Newfoundland. The response rate was 85% for a total of 3300 subjects. These data were analyzed by frequencies and by associations with sex, age and education. Nonparametric correlation, factor and cluster analyses on variables were used to verify if health status had identifiable dimensions. All these methods produced similar results showing five distinct factors. The first factor is composed of variables related to disease (disability/chronic conditions/worry about health); the second, to happiness (happiness/emotional); the third, to subjective appraisal of health (physical condition/ comparative level of energy/self-rated health status). Finally, the fourth and fifth factors were single variables; restriction of normal activities and social contacts. An interesting finding was that self-rated health status was distributed with almost equal weight in both the first and third factors. A validation of the 10 variables and the 5 factors was undertaken by studying their association with health care utilization. Two measures of utilization were used; number of physicians' visits in a year and number of hospital days in a 4-year period. Number of chronic conditions, disability and self-rated health status were associated with both measures of utilization; factor 1 was the only summary construct showing association with utilization. This paper demonstrates that self-rated health status is valid as a single measure of overal health status in this sample, being associated with both disease and subjective assessment components.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 29 (1989)
Issue (Month): 6 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:29:y:1989:i:6:p:761-768. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.