SF-36v2 norms for New Zealanders aged 55-69 years

New Zealand Medical Journal

Volumn 123, Issue 1327, 2010, Pages 47-57

  Stephens, Christine ^a   Alpass, Fiona ^a   Baars, Merel ^a   Towers, Andy ^a   Stevenson, Brendan ^a  

^a MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; NEW ZEALAND; POPULATION RESEARCH; QUALITY OF LIFE; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 36; SOCIAL STATUS;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; NEW ZEALAND; QUALITY OF LIFE; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 78650722950     PISSN: None     EISSN: 11758716     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Ware JH, Kosinski M, Dewey J. How to score version 2.0 of the SF-36 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric, Inc; 2000.
2. Ware JE, Jr., Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection. Medical Care 1992;30(6):473-83.
3. Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG, Karvouni A, Kouri I, Ioannidis JPA. Reporting and interpretation of SF-36 outcomes in randomised trials: systematic review. BMJ 2009;339:doi: 10.1136/bmj.a3006.
4. Lyons RA, Perry IM, Littlepage BNC. Evidence for the validity of the Short-form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36) in an elderly population. Age and Ageing 1994;23(3):182-4.
5. Jenkinson C, Stewart-Brown S, Petersen S, Paice C. Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1999;53(1):46-50.
6. Scott KM, Tobias M, Sarfati D, Haslett SJ. SF-36 health survey reliability, validity and norms for New Zealand. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 1999;23(4):401-6.
7. Statistics New Zealand. New Zealand Census of Population and Dwellings 2006, Wellington, NZ: Statistics New Zealand; 2007.
8. Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
9. Chandola T, Ferrie J, Sacker A, Marmot M. Social inequalities in self reported health in early old age: follow-up of prospective cohort study.[see comment]. BMJ 2007;334(7601):990.
10. New Zealand Ministry of Health. A Portrait of Health: Key results of the 2006/07 New Zealand Health Survey - Appendix 5. Ministry of Health Wellington; 2008. http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/portrait-of-health-appendix5
11. Wheadon M, Kokaua J. Midland Community Health Survey results - Selected results from the validation of the SF-36 as a health status measure for a New Zealand population. Hamilton, New Zealand: Hamilton, Health and Disability Analysis Unit, Midland Health; 1994.
12. Parr A, Whittaker R, Jackson G. The Northern Region Health Survey. Auckland, New Zealand: HFA Northern Office; 1998.
13. Sporle A, Pearce N, Davis P. Social class differences in Maori and non-Maori aged 15-64 during the last two decades. New Zealand Medical Journal 2002;115:127-31.
14. Jatrana S, Blakely T. Ethnic inequalities in mortality among the elderly in New Zealand. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2008;32(5):437-43.
15. Blakely T, Fawcett J, Hunt D, Wilson N. What is the contribution of smoking and socioeconomic position to ethnic inequalities in mortality in New Zealand? The Lancet 2006;368(9529):44-52.
16. Scott KM, Sarfati D, Tobias, MI, Haslett SJ. A challenge to the cross-cultural validity of the SF-36 health survey: Factor structure in Maori, Pacific and New Zealand European ethnic groups. Social Science & Medicine 2000; 51:1655-1664.
17. United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision. Male and female deaths, by major area, region and country, estimates 1950-2050. CD ROM edition, 2009.