skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

A cross-sectional and semantic investigation of self-rated health in the northern Sweden MONICA-study

BMC medical research methodology, 2012-10, Vol.12 (1), p.154-154, Article 154 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

COPYRIGHT 2012 BioMed Central Ltd. ;Copyright ©2012 Waller et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012 Waller et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. ;ISSN: 1471-2288 ;EISSN: 1471-2288 ;DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-154 ;PMID: 23046741

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    A cross-sectional and semantic investigation of self-rated health in the northern Sweden MONICA-study
  • Author: Waller, Göran ; Thalén, Peder ; Janlert, Urban ; Hamberg, Katarina ; Forssén, Annika
  • Subjects: Adult ; Comparative analysis ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Female ; Health ; Health Status ; Health surveys ; Humans ; Investigations ; Male ; Medical research ; Medicine, Experimental ; Methods ; Middle Aged ; Quality of Life ; Questionnaires ; Self-Assessment ; Semantics ; Surveys ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Sweden
  • Is Part Of: BMC medical research methodology, 2012-10, Vol.12 (1), p.154-154, Article 154
  • Description: Self-Rated Health (SRH) correlates with risk of illness and death. But how are different questions of SRH to be interpreted? Does it matter whether one asks: "How would you assess your general state of health?"(General SRH) or "How would you assess your general state of health compared to persons of your own age?"(Comparative SRH)? Does the context in a questionnaire affect the answers? The aim of this paper is to examine the meaning of two questions on self-rated health, the statistical distribution of the answers, and whether the context of the question in a questionnaire affects the answers. Statistical and semantic methodologies were used to analyse the answers of two different SRH questions in a cross-sectional survey, the MONICA-project of northern Sweden. The answers from 3504 persons were analysed. The statistical distributions of answers differed. The most common answer to the General SRH was "good", while the most common answer to the Comparative SRH was "similar". The semantic analysis showed that what is assessed in SRH is not health in a medical and lexical sense but fields of association connected to health, for example health behaviour, functional ability, youth, looks, way of life. The meaning and function of the two questions differ - mainly due to the comparing reference in Comparative SRH. The context in the questionnaire may have affected the statistics. Health is primarily assessed in terms of its sense-relations (associations) and Comparative SRH and General SRH contain different information on SRH. Comparative SRH is semantically more distinct. The context of the questions in a questionnaire may affect the way self-rated health questions are answered. Comparative SRH should not be eliminated from use in questionnaires. Its usefulness in clinical encounters should be investigated.
  • Publisher: England: BioMed Central Ltd
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 1471-2288
    EISSN: 1471-2288
    DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-154
    PMID: 23046741
  • Source: Geneva Foundation Free Medical Journals at publisher websites
    MEDLINE
    PubMed Central
    SWEPUB Freely available online
    Springer OA刊
    ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
    ProQuest Central
    DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait