Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10335740›Full record

ArticleMedical care1999

The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability.

M Kosinski, S D Keller, H T Hatoum, S X Kong, J E Ware

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02663895 (A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Treprostinil in the Treatment of Calcinosis in Patients With Systemic Sclerosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 73 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02663895 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Treprostinil in the Treatment of Calcinosis in Patients With Systemic Sclerosis

TypeinterventionalSponsorStanford UniversityRan2016 to 2020Enrolled12ConditionsSystemic Sclerosis, CalcinosisArmsOral treprostinil
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 183 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Are factor analytical techniques used appropriately in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analysis of the SF-36.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2005
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Effect of tele-rehabilitation on health outcomes in overweight and obese elderly women with locomotor disabilities from knee osteoarthritis: A randomised controlled trial.Hong Kong physiotherapy journal : official publication of the Hong Kong Physiotherapy Association Limited = Wu li chih liao · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M KosinskiHealth Assessment Lab, Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
S D Keller
H T Hatoum
S X Kong
J E Ware
Tufts Medical Center · USApplied Thin Films (United States) · USMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the psychometric assumptions underlying the construction and scoring of SF-36 scales and summary measures among clinical trial participants with arthritis.

methodsCross-sectional SF-36 data from the baseline assessment of adult patients (n = 1,016) participating in four placebo-controlled clinical trials of treatment for arthritis were analyzed with blinding as to treatment. Tests of the completeness of data, scaling assumptions, internal-consistency reliability, and factor structure of SF-36 scales were performed for the combined sample. Eligible participants had at least a 6-month history of moderate to severe osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis of the knee or hip. Participants meeting inclusion criteria had undergone a washout period of 3-14 days before baseline assessment to bring about a flare state in osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. Baseline sample sizes for the three osteoarthritis trials were n = 121, n = 341, and n = 187. The baseline sample size for the rheumatoid arthritis trial was n = 367. The average age of participants was 60 years, and the majority were females (72%). Measured were functional health and well-being scales and physical and mental health summary measures from the SF-36 Health Survey acute form.

resultsMissing responses ranged from 0.0% to 1.5% across SF-36 items, and scale scores could be computed for 96.8% to 100% of participants across trials. In all four trials, item internal consistency tests were passed (91.4%-97.1%) and item discriminant validity tests were passed (96.9%-100.0%). Across the four trials, internal-consistency reliability coefficients ranged from a low of 0.75 to a high of 0.91 for the eight scales (median = 0.84), exceeding the minimum standards for group comparisons. Ceiling effects were minimal for most scales, and floor effects were noteworthy for the role physical and role emotional scales. Physical and mental health factors identified in previous studies were replicated.

conclusionThe SF-36 Health Survey proved to be a psychometrically sound tool for the assessment of the health status of adult participants in clinical trials of arthritis.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsAdolescentAdultAgedArthritis, RheumatoidClinical Trials as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritisOutcome Assessment, Health CarePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID10335740
OpenAlexW2034164005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.