Original article
Standards for validating health measures: Definition and content

https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90003-8Get rights and content

Abstract

Adherence to standards for judging the content validity of health measures and for labeling them is needed for the field of health assessment to proceed in an orderly fashion. This paper discusses the dimensionality of health and the range of health states that can be measured within each dimension. These two attributes of published definitions of health are used to derive minimum standards for judging the validity of health measures in terms of their content. Five generic health concepts are defined: physical health, mental health, social functioning, role functioning, and general health perceptions. Items from widely used health measures are presented to clarify distinctions among these concepts and the different health states they encompass. It is recommended that labels be assigned to health measures in a manner consistent with their content and other evidence of validity.

References (53)

  • A Campbell et al.

    The Quality of American Life

    (1976)
  • FM Andrews et al.

    Social Indicators of Well-Being

    (1976)
  • JE Ware

    The Assessment of Health Status

  • World Health Organization

    Constitution of the World Health Organization

  • JE Ware et al.

    Analysis of Relationships Among Health Status Measures

  • AL Stewart et al.

    Physical Health in Terms of Functioning

  • JE Ware et al.

    Mental Health

  • CA Donald et al.

    Social Health

  • CA Donald et al.

    The measurement of social support

  • AR Davies et al.

    Measuring Health Perceptions in the Health Insurance Experiment

    (1981)
  • WG Manning et al.

    The Status of health in demand estimation; or beyond excellent, good, fair, poor

  • JE Ware et al.

    Health status and the use of outpatient mental health services

    Am Psychol

    (1984)
  • RH Brook et al.

    Effect of Coinsurance on the Health of Adults

    (1984)
  • JE Ware et al.

    Health Outcomes for Adults in Prepaid And Fee-for-Service Systems of Care: Results from the Health Insurance Experiment

    (1987)
  • S Katz et al.

    Studies of illness in the aged

    JAMA

    (1963)
  • RA Kane et al.

    Assessing the Elderly

    (1981)
  • Cited by (460)

    • A practical approach to the assessment and quantification of content validity

      2022, Contemporary Research Methods in Pharmacy and Health Services
    • The Unfolding Method to Explore Health-Related Quality of Life Constructs in a Chinese General Population

      2021, Value in Health
      Citation Excerpt :

      Another characteristic of HRQOL is its multidimensionality.4,6 Most definitions of HRQOL include multiple domains, such as physical function, mental/psychological well-being, social function, role function, and global perceptions of function and well-being, with a diverse list of health items that can be included in each domain.3,7,8 Because HRQOL is a complex, multifaceted concept and is closely associated with people’s subjective assessment of their own health, it is crucial to include items that are relevant and important to target populations’ subjective health evaluation.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Preparation of this paper was supported by grants for the Medical Outcomes Study from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, and The Pew Memorial Trust.

    View full text