IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v37y1993i1p69-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tacit models of disability underlying health status instruments

Author

Listed:
  • Ziebland, Sue
  • Fitzpatrick, Ray
  • Jenkinson, Crispin

Abstract

In recent years much attention has been paid to the development of measures of subjective health status yet, although statistical criteria of reliability and validity have been quite rigourously tested, there has been little consideration of the different theories of disability which underlie the design. The sociology of disability may illuminate such tacit theories. It is suggested that the development of health status questionnaires has not been one of simple rational accumulation in response to methodological advances. Through an examination of the content of health assessment questionnaires, four distinct models of disability are indentified. These are shown to influence not only the focus of the content and phrasing of the questions but also, crucially, the way that they perform and how responsive they are to change. The models (the functional, subjective distress, comparative and dependence) are illustrated and discussed in terms related to research design.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziebland, Sue & Fitzpatrick, Ray & Jenkinson, Crispin, 1993. "Tacit models of disability underlying health status instruments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 69-75, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:37:y:1993:i:1:p:69-75
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(93)90319-Y
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sophie Staniszewska & Kirstie Haywood & Jo Brett & Liz Tutton, 2012. "Patient and Public Involvement in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(2), pages 79-87, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:37:y:1993:i:1:p:69-75. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.