Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32972402›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2020

A comparison of the four healthy days measures (HRQOL-4) with a single measure of self-rated general health in a population-based health survey in New York City.

Sarah E Dumas, Tenzin Yangchen Dongchung, Michael L Sanderson, Katherine Bartley, Amber Levanon Seligson

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Gender predictors of adverse health.Journal of health psychology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sarah E DumasBureau of Epidemiology Services, Division of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, NY, 11101, USA. sdumas1@health.nyc.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0974-6437
Tenzin Yangchen DongchungBureau of Epidemiology Services, Division of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, NY, 11101, USA.
Michael L SandersonBureau of Epidemiology Services, Division of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, NY, 11101, USA.
Katherine BartleyBureau of Epidemiology Services, Division of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, NY, 11101, USA.
Amber Levanon SeligsonBureau of Epidemiology Services, Division of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, NY, 11101, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) can be used to track health disparities, assess the impact of chronic diseases, and predict mortality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Healthy Days Measures" (HRQOL-4) assesses four key domains: self-rated general health, physical health, mental health, and activity limitations. The domains are not easily combined to summarize overall HRQOL, and some evidence suggests that self-rated general health may be an adequate proxy indicator for overall HRQOL. This study compares self-rated general health as a solitary measure of HRQOL with two summary indices of the HRQOL-4 as a predictor of adverse health conditions in a representative sample of adult New York City residents.

methodsThe 2017 NYC Social Determinants of Health survey implemented by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene collected data from a representative sample of New Yorkers (n = 2335) via phone, mail, and web. We compared the information criteria and predictive power of self-rated general health with two alternative summary indices of the HRQOL-4 in predicting self-reported health conditions (hypertension, diabetes, obesity, non-specific psychological distress, and a summary indicator for at least one those four morbidities).

resultsOverall, 19.1% (95% CI: 16.9, 21.5) of respondents reported that they had fair or poor general health. Self-rated general health was significantly associated with days of poor physical health, poor mental health, and activity limitations (p < 0.001 for each). While the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria suggested that the summary indices of the HRQOL-4 produced marginally better models for predicting adverse health conditions, self-rated general health had slightly higher predictive power than did the summary indices in all models of physical health outcomes as measured by Tjur's pseudo-R

conclusionWe found very small differences between self-rated general health and the summary indices of the HRQOL-4 in predicting health conditions, suggesting self-rated general health is an appropriate proxy measure of overall HRQOL. Because it can be measured with a single question rather than four, it might be the most simple, efficient, and cost-effective method of summarizing HRQOL in large population-based surveys.

Indexed as

Health StatusHealth Status IndicatorsQuality of LifeAdultChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew York CityPublic Health SurveillanceSelf ReportHealth-related quality of lifeHealthy days measuresPopulation-based health surveysPredictive powerSelf-rated general health

Identifiers

PMID32972402
PMCPMC7517637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.