IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v55y2002i10p1725-1744.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a questionnaire for quantitative assessment in the field of health and human rights

Author

Listed:
  • Wildner, Manfred
  • Fischer, Richela
  • Brunner, Anne

Abstract

We hypothesize that a human rights framework would be able to analyse central health-related societal issues within important settings like the work place, the family or the health care system. Our study goal was the development and population-based evaluation of a questionnaire for assessment of the perceived human rights status. A questionnaire (HR-14) was developed from the guiding principles of international human rights legislation. For its psychometric evaluation, computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted in four cities in Europe (Munich, Dresden, Vienna and Bern). Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.76. Factor analysis supported the concept of human rights as indivisible and interdependent. Extracted factors were consistent with the preliminary settings of family and friends, health care system and community at large, and a supplementary setting workplace. Perceived human rights status was associated with physical function, mental/emotional health, age, study region, general health and employment status. We conclude that it is possible to develop a human rights questionnaire with good psychometric properties. Measurement of the perceived human rights status of populations and population groups may contribute to health policies sensitive to human rights.

Suggested Citation

  • Wildner, Manfred & Fischer, Richela & Brunner, Anne, 2002. "Development of a questionnaire for quantitative assessment in the field of health and human rights," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(10), pages 1725-1744, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:10:p:1725-1744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(01)00300-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:10:p:1725-1744. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.