1993
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.306.6890.1437
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Short form 36 (SF36) health survey questionnaire: normative data for adults of working age.

Abstract: Objectives-To gain population norms for the short form 36 health survey questionnaire (SF36) in a large community sample and to explore the questionnaire's internal consistency and validity.Design-Postal survey by using a booklet containing the SF 36 and several other items concerned with lifestyles and illness.Setting--The sample was drawn from computerised registers ofthe family health services authorities for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

43
888
19
26

Year Published

1997
1997
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,434 publications
(977 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
43
888
19
26
Order By: Relevance
“…1). Facebook recruited significantly more young participants (18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37), whereas e-mail recruited significantly more participants age 68-77. Flyers recruited significantly fewer participants age 18-27 (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1). Facebook recruited significantly more young participants (18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37), whereas e-mail recruited significantly more participants age 68-77. Flyers recruited significantly fewer participants age 18-27 (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[16] Lastly, rather than presenting SF-36 PF normative data from HCS, we have produced normative statistics using data from older men and women who participated in the nationally representative HSE in 1996 (the only year that the SF-36 was included in the survey). We elected not to use previously published sources of UK SF-36 normative data [12,31] because: these norms were derived from local studies which were not representative of England and Wales; the sample sizes for older people were relatively small; appropriate summary statistics for the skewed SF-36 PF score [32] were not presented; and normative data were not provided by gender and age group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scores have been compared with those of a large British community sample 5 for which the confidence intervals for the difference between means are shown. Not surprisingly, subjective physical functioning, limitations on physical role and general health fell below that of the well reference group.…”
Section: Quantitative Findingsmentioning
confidence: 99%