Exploring the SF-36, V2: Measuring the Quality of Life of AgrAbility Program Participants Ronald C. Jester Robert A. Wilson University of Delaware National.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Reliability and Validity of Researcher-Made Surveys.

Advertisements

Assessment of Reliable Change: Methods and Assumptions Michael Basso, Ph.D. Associate Professor and Director of Clinical Training Department of Psychology—University.

General Information --- What is the purpose of the test? For what population is the designed? Is this population relevant to the people who will take your.

Evaluation and Accountability Evaluation Institute and its role in evaluating private schools Evaluating schools’ processes and outcomes soundly, systematically.

Development and initial validation of the ‘Bristol Impact of Hypermobility’ (BIoH) questionnaire ST Palmer a, F Cramp a, R Lewis b, G Gould c, E Clark.

Work motivation among healthcare professionals in the Saudi hospitals Presented by Nouf Sahal Al-Harbi Supervised by: Dr. Saad Al-Ghanim 2008.

Effectively Utilizing Data Collection: A Case Study of a Functioning System Robert Bartelt & Kristen Gay Silver Springs – Martin Luther School.

A Comparative Analysis of Croatian Immigrant's and the Australian Population's subjective quality of life and self-perceived health status Gorka Vuletić.

Valuing the SF-6D: a nonparametric approach using individual level preference data Part 1): The SF-6D and its valuation Samer A Kharroubi, Tony O’Hagan,

Health related quality of life and satisfaction with life in Croatia Gorka Vuletic, BPsychol, PhD Andrija Stampar School of Public Health Medical Faculty,

Chapter 13 Survey Designs

Self-Report Measures of Functional Status and Quality of Life: Adults Sandra A. Mitchell, CRNP, M.Sc.N., AOCN National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD.

© HHL Group March 2013 Ray Wihapi 14 November 2013 Te Whiringa Ora.

1 8/14/2015 Evaluating the Significance of Health-Related Quality of Life Change in Individual Patients Ron Hays October 8, 2004 UCLA GIM/HSR.

Power Point Slides by Ronald J. Shope in collaboration with John W. Creswell Chapter 13 Survey Designs.

Power Point Slides by Ronald J. Shope in collaboration with John W. Creswell Chapter 13 Survey Designs.

National Outcomes and Casemix Collection Training Workshop

Measuring AgrAbility Outcomes with Quality of Life Indicators Robert A. Wilson, Ph.D., M.Sc. University of Delaware Center for Applied Demography and Survey.

Psychometric Characteristics of the Pain Treatment Satisfaction Scale Robyn L. Walker 1, Michael E. Clark 1,2, Ronald J. Gironda 1,2 1 James A. Haley Veteran’s.

Evaluating Mental Health Services Christine B. Kleinpeter, MSW., Psy.D., Professor CSU, Long Beach Rob Bachmann, RN, MN, Director Golden West College.

Some Approaches to Evaluation: A Focus on Outcomes Assoc Prof Jan Sansoni Australian Health Outcomes Collaboration Australian Health Services Research.

Primary school-based counselling: Is it associated with reductions in psychological distress? Mick Cooper Professor of Counselling.

13th Annual Interdisciplinary Research Conference

Overview of Phase I Data: Approach and Findings Gary Bess Associates April 15, 2009.

Development and results of an older adult health communication program using the Theory of Planned Behavior Virginia Brown, DrPH; Lisa McCoy, MS The National.

IMPACT OF BLANTYRE TEEN CLUB( BTC) ON THE LIVES OF HIV- POSITIVE TEENS AND THEIR GUARDIANS. Munkhondya, B., Kapito, E., Chamanga, R., Chadza, E., Bwazi,

MEASUREMENT: VALIDITY Lu Ann Aday, Ph.D. The University of Texas School of Public Health.

Promoting Independence in Agriculture AANTWMcGill QOL (Rev b) AgrAbility NTW McGill QOL Wichita, KS 2008 National Training Workshop 1:30-3:00.

The Use of Distance Learning Technology by Business Educators for Credentialing and Instruction Christal C. Pritchett, Ed.D. NABTE Research Session Anaheim,

North Carolina and the Supports Intensity Scale

Another Perspective on PRO Content in Clinical Practice Ron D. Hays, Ph.D. University of California, Los Angeles June 25, 2007.

Development of Physical and Mental Health Summary Scores from PROMIS Global Items Ron D. Hays ( ) UCLA Department of Medicine

Conclusion Motivation and Health Related Quality of Life in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation for Destination Therapy C. Gallagher.

If we build a partnership will they come? Integrating Needs Assessment, Process Evaluation, and Impact Evaluation Ronald Jester and Robert Wilson, University.

SCHOOL COUNSELING INTERVENTIONS Adrienne WatkinsBall State University.

Tips and Guidelines. Chapter Four: Results Assessments Questionnaires/SurveysTest Scores/Report Card Data Rationale Why study is needed?What results will.

Homelessness and Mental Illness: The Medical Students’ Viewpoints Charity Pires BS, Sarah Hilton MS, Faneece Embry BS, Anthony Ahmed PhD, Edna Stirewalt.

Mental health of nursing: There are differences between men and women? Saavedra, A. I. 1, Sánchez-López, M. P. 2 & Cuellar-Flores, I. 1, 2 1 Hospital Universitario.

Department of Defense Voluntary Protection Programs Center of Excellence Development, Validation, Implementation and Enhancement for a Voluntary Protection.

The relationship between work and improved health, safety and well-being Andy Smith, Emma Wadsworth, Katherine Chaplin, Paul Allen & George Mark.

Patient Baseline Assessment

Janet Vogt, Kim Ankers, Barry Isaacs Surrey Place Centre

Proportion of patients reporting scores ≥age-matched and gender-matched normative PRO values at baseline and 24 weeks in the (A) AMBITION and (B) ADACTA.

Project Name: Country:

Mean changes in the Short Form-36 subscales from baseline values for combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) (n=16), and chronic obstructive pulmonary.

Ronald C. Jester Robert A. Wilson University of Delaware

Lung Resection Improves the Quality of Life of Patients With Symptomatic Bronchiectasis Camilla Carlini Vallilo, MS, Ricardo Mingarini Terra, MD, PhD,

Health-Related Quality-of-Life Measures: Evidence from Tunisian Population Using the SF-12 Health Survey Moheddine Younsi, PhD Value in Health Regional.

The Impact of Pain Management on Quality of Life

Baseline Comorbidity Associated With the Short-Term Effects of Exercise Intervention on Quality of Life in the Japanese Older Population: An Observational.

Work Schedule Methodological Issues Variables Constant

Health-Related Quality of Life Outcome After On-Pump Versus Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study Reza Motallebzadeh,

Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement J.M. Quintana, Ph.D., A. Escobar, M.D., A. Bilbao,

Health Status Rated With the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey After Spinal Cord Injury Mark J. Haran, Bonsan B. Lee, Madeleine.

Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages (March 2006)

Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life After Maze Surgery for Atrial Fibrillation Catharina Lundberg, MD, Anders Albåge, MD, PhD, Carina Carnlöf, RN,

Samantha J. Davis, BS, Lili Zhao, PhD, Andrew C. Chang, MD, Mark B

(A) Quality of life scores in individuals with and without constipation. (A) Quality of life scores in individuals with and without constipation. (B) Quality.

Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes and disease activity scores at week 24. Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes.

Evaluating Life Skills Development Through 4-H Challenge Course Outcomes VanderWey, S. Cooper, R. North American Association for Environmental Education.

SF-36 domain scores at baseline and 24 weeks compared with age-matched and gender-matched normative values in the (A) AMBITION and (B) ADACTA trial populations.

ID Dr. Natālija Nikrus, Dr. Maija Vikmane, Prof. Oskars Kalējs

Mean individual and summative SF-36 V2 scores before and 3 months after ablation. Mean individual and summative SF-36 V2 scores before and 3 months after.

Percentages of patients reporting improvements from baseline ≥minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and number needed to treat (NNT) in (A) patient-reported.

Spydergram of mean SF-36 domain scores at baseline and weeks 12 (A) and 24 (B) for sarilumab 150 mg and 200 mg+csDMARDs compared with placebo+csDMARDs.

Spider plot of the unstandardised SF-36v2 subscales, comparing our HCM population with the mean for the general population (aged 45–54 years). Spider plot.

J. J. Smith, FRCS, A. M. Garratt, PhD, M. Guest, FRCS, R. M

Proportion of patients reporting improvements from baseline in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) ≥ the MCID at (A) 16 weeks in OPTION, (B) 12 weeks in BREVACTA.

Evaluating the Significance of Individual Change

Patient-reported Outcome Measures

Presentation transcript:

Exploring the SF-36, V2: Measuring the Quality of Life of AgrAbility Program Participants Ronald C. Jester Robert A. Wilson University of Delaware National AgrAbility Training Workshop October 6, 2009

This evaluation focuses on Quality of Life enhancements associated with the AgrAbility Program Quality of Life is measured with the SF-36, Version 2. The SF-36 is the most widely-used quality of life survey in health research. Validity and reliability of the SF-36 has been established through thousands of studies. The SF-36 scoring program generates quality of life measures for individuals and groups. The program also produces estimates of missing data, and scale reliability measures.

SF-36 Scoring: Inputs and Outputs The responses to the SF-36 questionnaire are entered into the SF-36 scoring program. The scoring program produces a comprehensive quality of life profile.

Statistical Analysis The output from the SF-36 scoring program is imported into SPSS (Statistical Program for the Social Sciences). Examples that follow are SPSS frequencies. Follow-up data at one year are compared with these pre-test measures. T-tests ( paired samples) are performed for the SF-36 indicator (means) and the other summary indicators.

The SF-36 Summary Measures The SF-36 quality of life indicators include 8 sub-scales and 2 summary quality of life indices: one for physical health and one for mental health. Health outcomes are gauged by comparing the averages of these scales prior to receiving service with the averages at one year into the AgrAbility Program.

T he SF-36 is calculated for 8 sub-scales (0-100): 1. Physical limitations 2. Limitations in social activities 3. Limitations in work and home roles 4. Bodily pain 5. Psychological distress and wellbeing 6. Limitations because of emotional problems 7. Energy and fatigue 8. General health perceptions

2 SF-36 quality of life summary scales: Physical Health (PH) Mental Health (MH) All scales are calibrated according to a U.S. general population survey norm of 50.

The following illustration shows a comparison of the SF-36 summary measures prior to the administration of a program with same measures after the program is administered. s

A minimum of 2 measurements are necessary to gauge program outcome: Time 1 Measurement at Program Intake Time 2 Measurement at 1-Year Follow-up

SF-36 Program Computer Output Following is SF-36 output for a sample of 41 AgrAbility clients at program intake.

Physical Functioning

Bodily Pain

General Health

Vitality

Social Functioning

Role-Emotional

Mental Health

Plans Complete baseline SF-36 survey for the entire active Delaware and Maryland caseload. Complete follow-up survey by December, Complete analysis of the follow-up survey by March,2010.