Dataset Information

How to Measure Population Health: An Exploration Toward an Integration of Valid and Reliable Instruments.

ABSTRACT: Population health management initiatives are introduced to transform health and community services by implementing interventions that combine various services and address the continuum of health and well-being of populations. Insight is required into a population's health to evaluate implementation of these initiatives. This study aims to determine the performance of commonly used instruments for measuring a population's experienced health and explores the assessed concepts of population health. Survey-based Short Form 12, version 2 (SF12, health status), Patient Activation Measure 13 (PAM13), and Kessler 10 (K10, psychological distress) data of 3120 respondents was used. Floor/ceiling effects were studied using descriptive statistics. Validity was assessed using factor and discriminant analyses, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach ?. Finally, to study covered concepts, exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) were conducted, which included additional surveyed characteristics. The SF12 and PAM13 sum scores showed acceptable averages and distributions, while results of the K10 indicated a floor effect. SF12 and K10 measured their expected constructs, while PAM13 did not. The EFA of PAM13 displayed 1 instead of the expected 4 constructs. Reliability was good for all instruments (? 0.89-0.93). The overall EFA identified 4 concepts: mental, physical ability, lifestyle, and self-management. SF12 and PAM13, combined with lifestyle characteristics, are shown to provide insightful information to measure the physical, mental, lifestyle, and self-management concepts of population health. Future research should include additional instruments that cover new aspects introduced by recent definitions of health.

SUBMITTER: Hendrikx RJP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6070127 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How to Measure Population Health: An Exploration Toward an Integration of Valid and Reliable Instruments.

Hendrikx Roy J P RJP Spreeuwenberg Marieke D MD Drewes Hanneke W HW Ruwaard Dirk D Baan Caroline A CA

Population health management 20171206 4

Population health management initiatives are introduced to transform health and community services by implementing interventions that combine various services and address the continuum of health and well-being of populations. Insight is required into a population's health to evaluate implementation of these initiatives. This study aims to determine the performance of commonly used instruments for measuring a population's experienced health and explores the assessed concepts of population health. ...[more]

PMID: 29211631

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLoss of arm-hand performance due to a hemiparesis as a result of stroke or cerebral palsy (CP), leads to large problems in daily life of these patients. Assessment of arm-hand performance is important in both clinical practice and research. To gain more insight in e.g. effectiveness of common therapies for different patient populations with similar clinical characteristics, consensus regarding the choice and use of outcome measures is paramount. To guide this choice, an overview of available instruments is necessary. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, evaluate and categorize instruments, reported to be valid and reliable, assessing arm-hand performance at the ICF activity level in patients with stroke or cerebral palsy.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed to identify articles containing instruments assessing arm-hand skilled performance in patients with stroke or cerebral palsy. Instruments were identified and divided into the categories capacity, perceived performance and actual performance. A second search was performed to obtain information on their content and psychometrics.ResultsRegarding capacity, perceived performance and actual performance, 18, 9 and 3 instruments were included respectively. Only 3 of all included instruments were used and tested in both patient populations. The content of the instruments differed widely regarding the ICF levels measured, assessment of the amount of use versus the quality of use, the inclusion of unimanual and/or bimanual tasks and the inclusion of basic and/or extended tasks.ConclusionsAlthough many instruments assess capacity and perceived performance, a dearth exists of instruments assessing actual performance. In addition, instruments appropriate for more than one patient population are sparse. For actual performance, new instruments have to be developed, with specific focus on the usability in different patient populations and the assessment of quality of use as well as amount of use. Also, consensus about the choice and use of instruments within and across populations is needed.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To integrate items from two widely used oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) questionnaires, the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP), as well as culturally-specific items of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) into a four-dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. METHODS:Subjects came from an ancillary study of the Dimensions of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Project (N=267 patients, mean age±SD: 54.0±17.2years, 58% women.) Patients filled in the original 49 items of OHIP and 22 additional OHRQoL items in a cross-sectional study. These additional items consisted of 7 culturally specific OHIP items and 15 GOHAI or OIDP items with unique content not covered in OHIP-49. Before data collection, three experts hypothesized to which of the four OHRQoL dimensions these items belong. Hypotheses were tested in correlation analyses between the 22 items and the four dimension scores that were derived from OHIP-49. RESULTS:Five of the 22 items did not provide sufficient information to which dimension they belong. In 16 of the remaining 17 items, the pattern of correlation coefficients fitted experts' a priori hypotheses. Acceptance of 16 of the 17 hypotheses was interpreted as evidence that additional (not in OHIP-49 contained) OHRQoL items can be assigned to Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CONCLUSION:Items of three OHRQoL instruments can be integrated into a dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact can serve as a simple and clinically appealing set of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) dimensions and therefore provide an opportunity for simpler, but psychometrically improved OHRQoL measurement in the future.

Project description:BackgroundFrailty remains an elusive concept despite many efforts to define and measure it. The difficulty in translating the clinical profile of frail elderly people into a quantifiable assessment tool is due to the complex and heterogeneous nature of their health problems. Viewing frailty as a 'latent vulnerability' in older people this study aims to derive a model based measurement of frailty and examines its internal reliability in community dwelling elderly.MethodThe British Women's Heart and Health Study (BWHHS) cohort of 4286 women aged 60-79 years from 23 towns in Britain provided 35 frailty indicators expressed as binary categorical variables. These indicators were corrected for measurement error and assigned relative weights in its association with frailty. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) reduced the data to a smaller number of factors and was subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) which restricted the model by fitting the EFA-driven structure to observed data. Cox regression analysis compared the hazard ratios for adverse outcomes of the newly developed British frailty index (FI) with a widely known FI. This process was replicated in the MRC Assessment study of older people, a larger cohort drawn from 106 general practices in Britain.ResultsSeven factors explained the association between frailty indicators: physical ability, cardiac symptoms/disease, respiratory symptoms/disease, physiological measures, psychological problems, co-morbidities and visual impairment. Based on existing concepts and statistical indices of fit, frailty was best described using a General Specific Model. The British FI would serve as a better population metric than the FI as it enables people with varying degrees of frailty to be better distinguished over a wider range of scores. The British FI was a better independent predictor of all-cause mortality, hospitalization and institutionalization than the FI in both cohorts.ConclusionsFrailty is a multidimensional concept represented by a wide range of latent (not directly observed) attributes. This new measure provides more precise information than is currently recognized, of which cluster of frailty indicators are important in older people. This study could potentially improve quality of life among older people through targeted efforts in early prevention and treatment of frailty.

Dataset Information

How to Measure Population Health: An Exploration Toward an Integration of Valid and Reliable Instruments.

Publications

How to Measure Population Health: An Exploration Toward an Integration of Valid and Reliable Instruments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets