This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by HÅvard Loge, J. Articles by Kaasa, S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by HÅvard Loge, J. Articles by Kaasa, S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey: normative data from the general Norwegian population

Department of Behavioural Sciences in Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, j.h.loge{at}medisin.uio.no, Unit for Applied Clinical Research, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Stein Kaasa

Unit for Applied Clinical Research, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Palliative Medicine Unit, Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway

Anchoring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in population norms makes clinical interpretations more meaningful and is in accordance with practice in other fields of medicine. In this paper norms for the Short Form 36 (SF-36) are presented in a random sample, representative of the general Norwegian population. In addition, sociodemographic variables affecting the scale scores are explored and discussed. The response rate was 67%, being lowest among subjects aged 70 years or over. Data-completeness strongly declined with increasing age. Physical health scales were also strongly affected by age. In all scales, with the exception of general health perceptions, women reported having poorer health than men. Marital status affected the four mental health scales. Educational status affected all the scales, but the effect was smallest in the mental scales. These norms can be employed for comparison in case-control studies, or to interpret HRQOL changes in prospective studies. Differences in social status should be given special attention. Caution should be exercised when assessing subjective health or employing the norms among subjects aged 70 years or over.

Key Words: data quality • empirical validity • health-related quality of life • reference data • SF-36 survey.

Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 26, No. 4, 250-258 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/14034948980260040401


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?