+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Content comparison of self-reported disability measures for the elderly according to the international classification of functioning, disability and health



Content comparison of self-reported disability measures for the elderly according to the international classification of functioning, disability and health



Disability and Rehabilitation 36(11): 884-893



To identify self-reported disability measures developed for older adults by performing a systematic literature review and to compare the contents of all identified measures based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). A broad systematic literature search was performed in March 2012 in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PROQOLID. Each item in the identified measures was extracted and linked to the ICF categories. A content comparison between measures was performed. The content density and diversity of each measure were assessed by calculating the content density ratio (the number of meaningful concepts divided by the number of items in each questionnaire) and content diversity ratio (the number of different ICF categories divided by the number of linked meaningful concepts), respectively. We reviewed 5622 published articles and identified 13 eligible measures. In total, 293 meaningful concepts from 265 items were extracted, of which, 270 concepts were linked to the ICF. A total of 62 different ICF categories were addressed. EARRS, FHS and SF-LLFDI had the highest content density ratio, while FHS and KI had the highest content diversity ratio. Different measures differed considerably in content. The ICF can be used as a conceptual framework not only for assessing measures but also for developing new measures. According to this ICF-based content comparison, the contents of currently available measures for disability in older adults vary significantly from one another. Our study may provide useful information for the selection of suitable measures for a particular purpose, as well as the development of new measures.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 052318423

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 23930643

DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2013.822571


Related references

Linking quality-of-life measures using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Children and Youth Version in chronic health conditions: the example of young people with hemophilia. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 91(13 Suppl 1): S74-S83, 2012

A content analysis of peripheral arterial disease patient-reported outcome measures using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Disability and Rehabilitation 41(4): 456-464, 2019

Use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health to describe patient-reported disability: a comparison of Guillain Barré syndrome with multiple sclerosis in a community cohort. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 42(8): 708-714, 2010

Content comparison of health status measures for obesity based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health. International Journal of Obesity 30(12): 1791-1799, 2006

Content comparison of self-report measures used in vestibular rehabilitation based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Physical Therapy 91(3): 346-357, 2011

Content comparison of low back pain-specific measures based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Clinical Journal of Pain 22(2): 147-153, 2006

Content comparison of 115 health status measures in sleep medicine using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) as a reference. Sleep Medicine Reviews 15(1): 33-40, 2011

Content comparison of osteoporosis-targeted health status measures in relation to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Clinical Rheumatology 24(2): 139-144, 2005

The ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)--a Swiss army knife? Accessibility and disability in a Scandinavian disability magazine (SDM)--a quantitative content analysis. Health Policy 108(1): 67-75, 2012

Use of the international classification of functioning, disability and health to describe patient-reported disability: a comparison of motor neurone disease, Guillain-Barré syndrome and multiple sclerosis in an Australian cohort. Disability and Rehabilitation 34(4): 295-303, 2012

Comparison of physical activity questionnaires for the elderly with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)--an analysis of content. Bmc Public Health 15: 249, 2015

Content comparison of haemophilia specific patient-rated outcome measures with the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF, ICF-CY). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 8: 139, 2010

Comparison of generic patient-reported outcome measures used with upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders: linking process using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 46(4): 327-334, 2014

Upper limb prosthetic outcome measures: review and content comparison based on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Prosthetics and Orthotics International 34(2): 109-128, 2010

Content comparison of health-related quality of life measures used in stroke based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF): a systematic review. Quality of Life Research 16(5): 833-851, 2007