Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability of the Health Utilities Index—Mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian General Social Survey Health Questionnaire

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents information on the test-retest reliability of the Health Utility Index—Mark III (HUI) system used in cycle 6 of the Canadian General Social Survey (GSS). The HUI system used in this reliability study consists of an eight-attribute health status classification system (HSCS) and a function for generating a summary score of health-related quality of life. To estimate test-retest reliability, a stratified random sample of individuals (n=506) completing GSS telephone interviews during August and September, 1991 were interviewed again 1 month later. Weighting adjustments based on the probability of selection were invoked during the analyses to provide unbiased estimates of testretest reliability for all GSS respondents in the August-September period. The results indicate that the individual questions, attributes and provisional index scores generally provided reliable information on health status in the GSS. The exceptions to this were limitations in speech and dexterity which were reported very infrequently. Kappa estimates of test-retest reliability for individual questions varied from 0.184 to 0.766. For the eight attributes, kappa estimates varied from 0.137 to 0.728. Using the provisional index scores to quantify health overall, a test-retest reliability of 0.767 was obtained (intra-class correlation coefficient).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life.Ann Intern Med 1993;118: 622–629.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Patrick DL, Deyo RA. Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life.Med Care 1989;27 (Suppl.) S217-S232.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Torrance GW, Boyle MH, Horwood SP. Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states.Oper Res 1982;30: 1043–1069.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Feeny D, Furlong W, Barr RD, Torrance GW, Rosenbaum P, Weitzman S. A comprehensive multi-attribute system for classifying the health status of survivors of childhood cancer.J Clin Oncol 1992;10: 923–928.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Torrance GW, Furlong W, Feeny D, Boyle MH.Provisional Health Status Index for the Ontario Health Survey. Final Report Submitted to Statistics Canada. (Contract 44400900187) Hamilton, Ontario: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW.Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Feeny D, Torrance GW, Goldsmith CH, Furlong W, Boyle M. A multi-attribute approach to population health status. In:1993 Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association. Alexandria, Virginia: American Statistical Assoociation, 1994: 161–166.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW. Multiattribute health status classification systems: health utilities index.Pharmacoeconomics (in press).

  9. Torrance GW, Furlong W, Feeny D, Boyle M. Multiattribute preference functions: health utilities index.Pharmacoeconomics (in press).

  10. Catlin G, Will P. The National Population Health Survey: highlights of initial developments.Health Reports 1992; (Statistics Canada Cat. 82-003)4: 313–319.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Government of Canada.National Longitudinal Survey of Children: Overview of Survey Instruments 1994. (Cat. No. 94-02) Ottawa, Ontario: Author.

  12. Ontario Ministry of Health.Ontario Health Survey 1990: User's Guide Vol 1 Documentation. Toronto, Ontario: Premiers Council on Health, Well-Being and Social Justice, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Statistics Canada.General Social Health Survey (99); Public Use Microdata File Documentation and User's Guide. Ottawa, Ontario: Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Torrance GW, Zhang Y, Feeny D, Furlong W, Barr R.Multi-attribute Preference Functions for a Comprehensive Health Status Classification System (Working Paper 92-18). Hamilton, Ontario: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.Educ Psychol Measurement 1960;20: 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.Psychol Bull 1968;70: 213–22.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bartko JJ. On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients.Psychol Bull 1976;83: 762–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical agreement.Biometrics 1977;33: 159–174.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shrout PE, Spitzer RL, Fleiss JL. Quantification in agreement in psychiatric diagnosis revisited.Arch Gen Psychiatry 1987;44: 172–177.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hays RD, Anderson R, Revicki D. Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures.Qual Life Res 1993;2: 441–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. McDowell I, Newell C.Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    M. H. Boyle

  2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    M. H. Boyle, W. Furlong, D. Feeny & G. W. Torrance

  3. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    D. Feeny & G. W. Torrance

  4. Department of Management Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    G. W. Torrance

  5. Department of Economics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    D. Feeny

  6. Household Survey Methods Division, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Canada

    J. Hatcher

Authors
  1. M. H. Boyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. Furlong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Feeny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. W. Torrance
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Hatcher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This work was supported by Statistics Canada (Contract 84500900536). Dr Boyle is supported by a William T. Grant Faculty Scholar Award.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boyle, M.H., Furlong, W., Feeny, D. et al. Reliability of the Health Utilities Index—Mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian General Social Survey Health Questionnaire. Qual Life Res 4, 249–257 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02260864

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02260864

Key words

Search

Navigation