The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Health-Status Index and its Application to Health-Services Outcomes
Abstract
In order to develop an operational definition of health, we found it necessary first to develop the concept of function/dysfunction as a continuum, based on one's ability to carry on the usual daily activities appropriate to social roles. Then, to those operating the health system, each member of the population can be seen as belonging to one and only one state from a class of functional states that can be defined on an ordinal scale. Next, we found it necessary to assign to each state a weight defined on a cardinal scale, the set of weights for these states being called the Health Status Index (HSI). The HSI rests on value judgments, of a societal nature, expressed by the administrators responsible for policy decisions. Prognosis is then defined as the transitional probability of a change in functional state with time. Thus, the concepts “state of health” and “severity of illness” are decomposed into the parameters function/dysfunction and prognosis. Finally, together with an operational definition of time and target population, it becomes possible to give a quantitative definition of the output of a health program (or health system) as the changes in the functional history of the target population resulting from the intervention of the health program (or system). Other concepts that are given quantitative definitions are program effectiveness and population health status. This study next explores the relation between health program output and modern decision theory for program planning, and shows how these analytical tools are useful for fitting the results of the study into larger conceptual frameworks. Finally, the method developed is illustrated, first with a simplified simulated program for computer use, and then with an analysis of a small section of a tuberculosis-control program.
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
Cites
Parzen, E. (1999) · doi:10.1137/1.9781611971125 · Cited by 1,389
Cited by
EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life
(1990) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9 · Cited by 15,736
Donabedian, A. (1988) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.260.12.1743 · Cited by 5,895
Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference?
Karimi, M., & Brazier, J. (2016) · PharmacoEconomics · doi:10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9 · Cited by 1,646
Quality-of-life measures in chronic diseases of childhood
Eiser, C., & Morse, R. (2001) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta5040 · Cited by 872
Antihypertensive drugs in very old people: a subgroup meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Gueyffier, F., Bulpitt, C., Boissel, J.-P., Schron, E., Ekbom, T., Fagard, R., Casiglia, E., Kerlikowske, K., & Coope, J. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)08127-6 · Cited by 632
Metadata
- Authors
- Fanshel, S., & Bush, J. W.
- Venue
- Operations Research
- Published
- 1970-12
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1021-1066
- ISSN
- 0030-364X (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5463
- OpenAlex
- W2008433096
- Cited by
- 417
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 31.19
- 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: A Health-Status Index and its Application to Health-Services Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/opre.18.6.1021
- The paper
- Fanshel, S., & Bush, J. W. (1970). A Health-Status Index and its Application to Health-Services Outcomes. Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.18.6.1021
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.