Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire: Which normative data should be used? Comparisons between the norms provided by the Omnibus Survey in Britain, the Health Survey for England and the Oxford Healthy Life Survey

CHIME/Population Studies and Primary Care, Royal Free and University College London Medical School.
Journal of Public Health Medicine 09/1999; 21(3):255-270. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/21.3.255
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Background Population norms for the attributes included in measurement scales are required to provide a standard with which scores from other study populations can be compared. This study aimed to obtain population norms for the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire, derived from a random sample of the population in Britain who were interviewed at home, and to make comparisons with other commonly used norms. Methods The method was a face-to-face interview survey of a random sample of 2056 adults living at home in Britain (response rate 78 per cent). Comparisons of the SF-36 scores derived from this sample were made with the Health Survey for England and the Oxford Healthy Life Survey. Results Controlling for age and sex, many of mean scores on the SF-36 dimensions differed between the three datasets. The British interview sample had better total means for Physical Functioning, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Energy/Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The Health (interview) Survey for England had the lowest (worst) total mean scores for Physical Functioning, Social Functioning, Role Limitations (physical), Bodily Pain, and Health Percep- tions. The postal sample in central England had the lowest (worst) total mean scores for Role Limitations (emotional), Mental Health and Energy/Vitality. Conclusion Responses obtained from interview methods may suffer more from social desirability bias (resulting in inflated SF-36 scores) than postal surveys. Differences in SF- 36 means between surveys are also likely to reflect question order and contextual effects of the questionnaires. This indicates the importance of providing mode-specific popula- tion norms for the various methods of questionnaire

1 Follower
  • Source
    • "This latter formula defines clinically significant change as movement to within two standard deviations of the mean of the normal population on a particular variable. Normative data from the functional population was used to calculate cut-off scores to determine whether participants were in the normal population at post-treatment and follow-up (Lovibond and Lovibond, 1995; Bowling et al., 1999; Fairbank and Pynsent, 2000; Van Damme et al., 2002). This approach to clinical significance testing is more stringent than several other methods of measuring minimal clinically important differences (Dworkin et al., 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: This pilot study investigated the feasibility and clinical utility of implementing a novel, evidence-informed, interdisciplinary group intervention—Mindfulness Based Functional Therapy (MBFT)—for the management of persistent low back pain (LBP) in primary care. MBFT aimed to improve physical and psychological functioning in patients with persistent LBP. Design: A single-group repeated measures design was utilized to gather data about feasibility, effect sizes, clinically significant changes and patient satisfaction. Setting: A community sample of 16 adults (75% female), mean (SD) age 47.00 (9.12) years (range 26–65 years), with mean (SD) LBP duration of 8.00 (9.00) years participated, using a simulated primary care setting at Curtin University in Australia. Intervention: MBFT is an 8-week group intervention co-facilitated by psychology and physiotherapy disciplines. Content includes: mindfulness meditation training, cognitive-functional physiotherapeutic movement retraining, pain education, and group support. Main outcome measures: Several validated self-report measures were used to assess functional disability, emotional functioning, mindfulness, pain catastrophizing, health-related quality of life at baseline, post-intervention, and 6 months follow-up. Results: Adherence and satisfaction was high, with 85% of participants highly satisfied with MBFT. Clinical significance analysis and effect size estimates showed improvements in a number of variables, including pain catastrophizing, physical functioning, role limitations due to physical condition, and depression, although these may have occurred due to non-intervention effects. Conclusions: MBFT is feasible to implement in primary care. Preliminary findings suggest that a randomized controlled trial is warranted to investigate its efficacy in improving physical and emotional functioning in people with disabling persistent LBP.
    Frontiers in Psychology 08/2014; 5:839. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00839 · 2.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Given that the workers are working in the UK, it would normally be acceptable to compare their health to UK norms. Unfortunately though, the UK norms for SF36 are not yet sufficiently robust for such a purpose (Bowling et al., 1999). Consequently, the 1998 US national norms were used as the comparator for this instrument ( "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Significant environmental benefits are claimed for local food systems, but these biophysical indicators are increasingly recognised as inadequate descriptors of supply chain ethics. Social factors such as health are also important indicators of good practice, and are recognised by the organic and local food movements as important to the development of rounded sustainable agricultural practices. This study compared the self-reported health status of farm workers in the United Kingdom, Spain, Kenya and Uganda who were supplying distant markets with fresh vegetables. Workers on Kenyan export horticulture farms reported significantly higher levels of physical health than did Kenyan non-export farm workers and workers in the other study countries. Mean health levels for farm workers in the United Kingdom were significantly lower than relevant population norms, indicating widespread levels of poor health amongst these workers. These results suggest that globalised supply chains can provide social benefits to workers, while local food systems do not always provide desirable social outcomes. The causal mechanisms of these observations probably relate more to the social conditions of workers than directly to income.
    Environment international 10/2009; 35(7-35):1004-1014. DOI:10.1016/j.envint.2009.04.009 · 5.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Given that the workers are working in the UK, it would normally be acceptable to compare their health to UK norms. Unfortunately though, the UK norms for this instrument are not yet sufficiently robust for such a purpose (Bowling et al., 1999). Following standard practise, the 1998 US national norms were used as the comparator for this instrument (http://www.SF‐ "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study describes the self-reported health and well-being status of field and packhouse workers in UK vegetable horticulture, and tests the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the self-reported health of workers on organic and conventional horticultural farms. The majority of those sampled were migrant workers (93%) from Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and the Ukraine. More than 95% of the respondents were aged 18-34 and recruited through university agricultural faculties in East European or employed via UK agencies. The health of 605 farm workers (395 males and 210 females) was measured through the use of four standard health instruments. Farm workers' health was significantly poorer than published national norms for three different health instruments (Short Form 36, EuroQol EQ-5D and the Visual Analogue Scale). There were no significant differences in the health status of farm workers between conventional and organic farms for any of these three instruments. However, organic farm workers scored higher on a fourth health instrument the Short Depression Happiness Scale (SDHS) indicating that workers on organic farms were happier than their counterparts working on conventional farms. Multiple regression analysis suggested that the difference in the SDHS score for organic and conventional farms is closely related to the range and number of tasks the workers performed each day. These findings suggest that a great deal of improvement in the self-reported health of farmers will need to occur before organic farms meet the requirements of the 'Principle of Health' as described by IFOAM. Ensuring that farm workers have a varied range of tasks could be a cost effective means of improving self-reported health status in both organic and conventional farming systems.
    Science of The Total Environment 03/2008; 391(1):55-65. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.10.048 · 4.10 Impact Factor
Show more


Available from