ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2020
Comparing South Korean and US self-rated health using anchoring vignettes.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experience and Reporting of Postnatal Depression Across Cultures: A Comparison Using Anchoring Vignettes of Mothers in the United Kingdom and India.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- The impact of interpersonal reporting heterogeneity on cross-country differences in Healthy Life Years in Europe.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- The Impact of Parental Migration on Multidimensional Health of Children in Rural China: The Moderating Effect of Mobile Phone Addiction.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study compares the self-rated health (SRH) of South Korean and US respondents, using anchoring vignettes to adjust for reporting heterogeneity, i.e., cross-national differences in use of response categories.
methodsStudy participants, ages 20 to 59, were recruited from online survey panels retained by Embrain in Korea (N = 1170) and the US (N = 1033). In the analyses, we first examined the two key measurement assumptions of the anchoring vignette method. Response consistency was examined by regressing SRH on vignette ratings and EQ-5D, and was satisfied when the relationship between SRH and vignette ratings was significant and positive. Vignette equivalence was assessed by examining whether respondents correctly rank-ordered vignettes by health status severity. We then compared estimates of the between-country difference in SRH from two models: a standard ordered probit regression, and a hierarchical ordered probit (Hopit) regression, which adjusted for cross-country differences in use of response categories.
resultsThe anchoring vignettes satisfied both measurement assumptions. Results from the ordered probit regression indicated that Korean SRH was worse than that in the US. However, results from the Hopit regression revealed that Korean SRH was actually better than that in the US, after adjusting for Korean respondents' significantly higher intercategory thresholds (demarcating between "very bad" and "bad," "bad" and "fair," etc.).
conclusionThe apparently lower SRH of Korean vis-à-vis US respondents is an artifact of Koreans' higher standards for health-related response categories. After adjusting for these different standards, Korean SRH is revealed to be higher than US SRH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32770433What OpenQuestion holds
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.