Observed Agreement Problems between Sub-Scales and Summary Components of the SF-36 Version 2 - An Alternative Scoring Method Can Correct the Problem

Graeme Tucker, Robert Adams, David Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)


Purpose:A number of previous studies have shown inconsistencies between sub-scale scores and component summary scores using traditional scoring methods of the SF-36 version 1. This study addresses the issue in Version 2 and asks if the previous problems of disagreement between the eight SF-36 Version 1 sub-scale scores and the Physical and Mental Component Summary persist in version 2. A second study objective is to review the recommended scoring methods for the creation of factor scoring weights and the effect on producing summary scale scoresMethods:The 2004 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey dataset was used for the production of coefficients. There were 3,014 observations with full data for the SF-36. Data were analysed in LISREL V8.71. Confirmatory factor analysis models were fit to the data producing diagonally weighted least squares estimates. Scoring coefficients were validated on an independent dataset, the 2008 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey.Results:Problems of agreement were observed with the recommended orthogonal scoring methods which were corrected using confirmatory factor analysis.Conclusions:Confirmatory factor analysis is the preferred method to analyse SF-36 data, allowing for the correlation between physical and mental health.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere61191
JournalPloS one
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 12 Apr 2013

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • General

Cite this