The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Assessment of patient satisfaction in activities of daily living using a modified stanford health assessment questionnaire
Abstract
Patient satisfaction in performing activities of daily living (ADL) was assessed by using a self‐administered questionnaire modified from the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). The HAQ includes questions to determine a patient's degree of difficulty and need for help and assistive devices in ADL. A modification of the HAQ (MHAQ) was developed to include questions concerning perceived patient satisfaction regarding the same ADL, along with perceived change in degree of difficulty. In order to add additional questions while maintaining the length of the questionnaire in a format suitable in routine care, the number of ADL included in the MHAQ was reduced from 20 to 8. Information regarding degree of difficulty derived from 8 questions in the MHAQ is comparable with that derived from 20 questions in the HAQ. The response of a patient that a specific activity is associated with difficulty in functional capacity was not inevitably associated with the absence of patient satisfaction; 43.7% of patients responding “with some difficulty” and 19.1% of patients responding “with much difficulty” expressed satisfaction with their functional capacity. A major determinant of expression of patient satisfaction was perceived change in difficulty: 81.4% of patients noting that their function was “less difficult now,” in contrast to 16.9% of patients responding “more difficult now,” expressed satisfaction. These studies suggest that data regarding patient satisfaction and perceived change in difficulty can be assessed to more completely characterize patients' functional status in ADL.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A Prospective Study of Physical Activity and Cognitive Decline in Elderly Women: Women Who Walk
Yaffe, K., Barnes, D., Nevitt, M., Lui, L.-Y., & Covinsky, K. (2001) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.161.14.1703 · Cited by 921
Nishimoto, N., Yoshizaki, K., Miyasaka, N., Yamamoto, K., Kawai, S., Takeuchi, T., Hashimoto, J., Azuma, J., & Kishimoto, T. (2004) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.20303 · Cited by 788
Pincus, T., Callahan, L. F., Sale, W. G., Brooks, A. L., Payne, L. E., & Vaughn, W. K. (1984) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.1780270805 · Cited by 760
Self-citationAssessment of Psychosocial and Functional Impact of Chronic Pain
Turk, D. C., Fillingim, R. B., Ohrbach, R., & Patel, K. V. (2016) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2016.02.006 · Cited by 350
Greenberg, J. D., Kremer, J. M., Curtis, J. R., Hochberg, M. C., Reed, G., Tsao, P., Farkouh, M. E., Nasir, A., Setoguchi, S., & Solomon, D. H. (2011) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/ard.2010.129916 · Cited by 350
Metadata
- Authors
- Pincus, T., Summey, J. A., Soraci, S. A., Wallston, K. A., & Hummon, N. P.
- Venue
- Arthritis & Rheumatism
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1983-11
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1346-1353
- ISSN
- 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-0131
- OpenAlex
- W1982176411
- Cited by
- 1,337
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessment of patient satisfaction in activities of daily living using a modified stanford health assessment questionnaire. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.1780261107
- The paper
- Pincus, T., Summey, J. A., Soraci, S. A., Wallston, K. A., & Hummon, N. P. (1983). Assessment of patient satisfaction in activities of daily living using a modified stanford health assessment questionnaire. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.1780261107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.