Cited by 14Psychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Education and Validation

Measurement properties of the 12-item short-form health survey in stroke

Westergren, Albert, Hagell, Peter·2014·Journal of Neuroscience Nursing

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) was developed to measure perceived physical and mental health. Some studies of the psychometric properties, using classical test theory, of the SF-12 provide support for its use in patients with stroke, but it has not been scrutinized using recommended modern test theory approaches such as the Rasch measurement model among stroke survivors. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore the measurement properties of the SF-12 physical and mental health scales among people with stroke using the Rasch measurement model. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was used in this study. METHODS: All patients discharged from a dedicated stroke unit in southern Sweden during 6 months were asked to participate 6 months later. Of 120 stroke survivors, 89 (74%) agreed to participate. Rasch analysis was used to assess the measurement properties of the SF-12 physical and mental component summary scores (PCS-12 and MCS-12, respectively). RESULTS: For the PCS-12, we identified problems with targeting, overall and item-level fit, representing local response dependency, and multidimensionality. For the MCS-12, there were problems related to targeting (the persons felt better than the scale could conceptualize) and response categories that did not function as expected. However, MCS-12 items displayed reasonable model fit without indications of multidimensionality but with signs of local response dependency. CONCLUSION: The measurement properties of the MCS-12 in stroke appear reasonable unless milder mental health problems are of interest, whereas those of the PCS-12 are less acceptable. Given the interdependence between MCS-12 and PCS-12 that is inherent with the standard SF-12 scoring algorithm, such data should be interpreted with caution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/jnn.0000000000000027

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Westergren, A., & Hagell, P.
Affiliations
Kristianstad University (SE)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience Nursing
Published
2014-02
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
34-45
ISSN
0888-0395 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071225644
Cited by
14
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
SF-12, stroke survivors, Rasch model, psychometric properties, physical component summary, mental component summary, multidimensionality, targeting, health-related quality of life, mental health measurement
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Mental Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Sick Role, Sweden, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Comorbidity, Stroke, Cognitive Dysfunction

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