CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 68Health disparities and outcomesHealth and Medical StudiesSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Utility of Health data from Social Surveys: Is There a Gold Standard for Measuring Morbidity?

Ferraro, Kenneth F., Farmer, Melissa M.·1999·American Sociological Review
DOI 10.1177/000312249906400212
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Most sociological and epidemiological studies of health status in adulthood rely on reports of morbidity from respondents to social surveys. This study compares self-reported morbidity with indicators of morbidity from physicians ‘ evaluations and examines the predictive validity of each indicator on self-assessed health and mortality in adulthood. Special attention is given to differences in the measures between white and African American adults. Adults from a large national survey received a detailed medical examination by a physician; they also were asked about the presence of 36 health conditions. Results indicate that self-reported morbidity is equal or superior to physician-evaluated morbidity in a prognostic sense. Both types of morbidity predict self-assessed health for white respondents, but physician-evaluated morbidity is not related to either self-assessed health or mortality for African American respondents.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/000312249906400212

Cites

25 of 25 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. 10.1001/jama.1991.03460020102037 · DOI
  2. Gujarati Damodar N., 1988, Basic Econometrics
  3. Guralnik J. M., 1996, The Gerontologist, 36, 234
  4. Guralnik Jack M., 1995, The Women's Health and Aging Study.
  5. National Center for Health Statistics, 1965, Health Interview Responses Compared with Medical Records. Vital and Health Statistics.
  6. National Center for Health Statistics, 1993, Health, United States, 1992
  7. Pecoraro Roger E., 1979, Public Health Reports, 94, 231
  8. Shah Babubhai V., 1997, SUDAAN User's Manual.
  9. Smith Kevin W., 1993, Ethnicity and Disease, 3, 278
  10. World Health Organization, 1967, Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death: Based on Recommendations of the Eighth Revision Conference, 1965, and Adopted by the Nineteenth World Health Assembly

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ferraro, K. F., & Farmer, M. M.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Sociological Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1999-04
Volume
64
Issue
2
Pages
303-315
ISSN
  • 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-8271
DOI
10.1177/000312249906400212
OpenAlex
W4385886501
Cited by
64
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
self-reported morbidity, health status measurement, predictive validity, mortality prediction, self-rated health, racial differences, African American adults, White adults

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