Developing multiattribute health indexes.

M H Boyle; G W Torrance

doi:10.1097/00005650-198411000-00007

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 6503398

Developing multiattribute health indexes.

M H Boyle·G W Torrance

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This article reviews the procedures for developing a multiattribute health index for use in population health studies and program evaluations. The development of such indexes involves two steps: 1) the creation of a multiattribute health state classification system; and 2) the mapping of the system into a single metric scale. The system must be relevant for its intended use and as concise as possible. Because a limit exists in the number of attributes that can be included in the system while maintaining reliable measurement, there may be a trade-off between specificity of detail and breadth of coverage. When mapping the system into a scale of cardinal values, five issues arise: 1) the selection of a scaling technique; 2) the use of mathematic models to quantify health; 3) the selection of anchor points; 4) the selection of raters; and 5) the identification of factors that influence raters' judgments. The article reviews the procedures that are used, discusses the issues that arise, and proposes some solutions for the development of multiattribute health indexes.

Explore related subjects

Classification Health Services Research Health Status Indicators Health Surveys Humans Models, Theoretical Quality of Life Statistics as Topic United States Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

M H Boyle, G W Torrance. 1984. Developing multiattribute health indexes.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198411000-00007

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1995

Ultraviolet erythema sensitivity in anamnestic (I-IV) and phototested (1-4) Caucasian skin phototypes: the need for a new classification system.

The anamnestic skin phototypes (ASP) I-IV of 22 Caucasian volunteers wee compared with their phototested skin phototypes (PSP) using solar simulating, broadband UV radiation. The Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE)-weighted (i.e. erythemally effective) minimal erythema doses (MED) for solar simulating radiation varied from 20 mJ/cm2 (PSP type 1) to 57 mJ/cm2 (PSP type 4). In only 11 of 21 volunteers did the ASP (I-IV) and PSP (1-4) classifications coincide, and the MED values of the volunteers within the different ASP groups (I-IV) overlapped considerably. To compare the reactivity to erythematogenic radiation of different wavelengths, narrowband monochromator irradiations were performed at 298 nm, 310 nm and 330 nm. The CIE-weighted MED values at these wavelengths (20-80 mJ/cm2) corresponded well with those obtained in the broadband testing. Our results indicate that, with classification by interrogation, Caucasian skin can reliably be classified into only two subtypes, corresponding to Fitzpatrick phototypes I-III and phototype IV, respectively. A classification into four sensitivity types can be achieved by phototesting, only. We propose that the concept of ASP should be used with caution. The concept of PSP 1-4 should be favored.

Classification↗

PubMed1992

[A British system for classification of health care: "Spri" has studied the Read codes. It should be possible to adapt them for Swedish use].

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Classification↗

PubMed1992

[What is a scientific publication? On science and cultural hierarchies in medical research].

Discussions have taken place about relevant criteria for "scientific publications". That such criteria exist is apparent when faculties of medicine issue guidelines for classification and quantification of scientific publications. In this article the authors focus on lack of clarity and consistency in the prevailing classifications; for example, that the language in which it is published appears to be essential as such. Different disciplines must of necessity have a variety of forms of publication, depending on the target groups for the different publications. It is argued that classification and evaluation of scientific publications should be based on a more nauanced academic standpoint.

Classification↗