CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 353Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifePsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reliability and validity of the SF-12v2 in the medical expenditure panel survey

Cheak-Zamora, Nancy C., Wyrwich, Kathleen W., McBride, Timothy D.·2009·Quality of Life Research
DOI 10.1007/s11136-009-9483-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective Evaluate the reliability and validity of the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form version 2 (SF-12v2) in the 2003-2004 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).Research design Data were collected in the self-administered mail-out questionnaire and face-to-face interviews of the MEPS (n = 20,661). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability and construct, discriminate, predictive and concurrent validity were tested. The EQ-5D, perceived health and mental health questions were used to test construct and discriminate validity. Self-reported work, physical and cognitive limits tested predictive validity and number of chronic conditions assessed concurrent validity.Results Both Mental Component Summary Scores (MCS) and Physical Component Summary Scores (PCS) were shown to have high internal consistency reliability (alpha > .80). PCS showed high test-retest reliability (ICC = .78) while MCS demonstrated moderate reliability (ICC = .60). PCS had high convergent validity for EQ-5D items (except self-care) and physical health status (r > .56). MCS demonstrated moderate convergent validity on EQ-5D and mental health items (r > .38). PCS distinguish between groups with different physical and work limitations. Similarly, MCS distinguished between groups with and without cognitive limitations. The MCS and PCS showed perfect dose response when variations in scores were examined by participant's chronic condition status.Conclusions Both component scores showed adequate reliability and validity with the 2003-2004 MEPS and should be suitable for use in a variety of proposes within this database.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11136-009-9483-1

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Ware, J., Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D., & Gandek, B. (2002). SF12v2: How to score version 2 of the SF-12 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualiyMetric Incorporated.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–353 of 353

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cheak-Zamora, N. C., Wyrwich, K. W., & McBride, T. D.
Affiliations
  • United BioSource Corporation (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
ORCID
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2009-05-08
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
727-735
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
DOI
10.1007/s11136-009-9483-1
OpenAlex
W2073794479
Cited by
353
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 7
FWCI
16.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
SF-12v2, Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, health-related quality of life, reliability statistics, validity, construct validity, discriminant validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, EQ-5D, chronic disease, work limitations, cognitive limitations, physical limitations, mental component summary, physical component summary
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Health Expenditures, Female, Health Status, Health Surveys, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States

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