SF-36 v2
Sheryl LaCoursiere, RN, PhD(c)
the SPSS syntax for v.1 but don't know if it's available for v.2. Does
anyone know?
Thank you
Sheryl LaCoursiere, RN, PhD(c)
University of Connecticut
sheryl.la...@uconn.edu
Bruce Weaver
Have you looked at Paul Morris's webiste? He provides SPSS syntax free of
charge. I don't know which version of SF36, but I'm sure he can tell you.
Mind the wrap-around on the URL.
--
Bruce Weaver
E-mail: wea...@mcmaster.ca
Homepage: http://www.angelfire.com/wv/bwhomedir/
Derek
"comp.soft-sys.stat.spss" assembled, and proclaimed:
> Have you looked at Paul Morris's webiste? He provides SPSS
> syntax free of charge. I don't know which version of SF36, but
> I'm sure he can tell you. Mind the wrap-around on the URL.
Does anyone know how the UK version of the SF36 differs from the US
version?
Derek
--
Replace "nomail" with "email" if you wish to send me mail.
Consistency is the last ditch stand of the unimaginative.
Rich Ulrich
<wea...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Sheryl LaCoursiere, RN, PhD(c) wrote:
>
> > I am looking for the scoring algorithm for SF-36 v.2 for SPSS. I have
> > the SPSS syntax for v.1 but don't know if it's available for v.2. Does
> > anyone know?
> >
> > Thank you
> > Sheryl LaCoursiere, RN, PhD(c)
> > University of Connecticut
> > sheryl.la...@uconn.edu
>
> Have you looked at Paul Morris's webiste? He provides SPSS syntax free of
> charge. I don't know which version of SF36, but I'm sure he can tell you.
> Mind the wrap-around on the URL.
>
>
> http://www.stir.ac.uk/departments/humansciences/psychology/postgrads/pgm1/SF36_SPSS_syntax_programme.htm
The website says that it is the version in the UK manual.
I don't know what other variations might exist in the items, but
the item-ranges, at least, match the old US version, where choices
under #4 and #5 are yes/no, #9 is 1-6. (New: 1-5 on all three.)
I don't use SF-36, but I fixed up a scoring program a few years
ago. I can send a copy to anyone who wants one -- it is only lightly
documented, and it names the variables in the arbitrary way that the
original user needed. If old-US matches Paul's UK standards, then
these results would be expected to match Paul's. (Comparing
these independent versions is one way that you might
try a cross-check on scoring.)
--
Rich Ulrich, wpi...@pitt.edu
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
black...@googlemail.com
I was wondering if you still had the possibility to send me your scoring Programm for the SF 36? I do realize that you posted this offer in 2002. I am a student currently working with the SF 36 which give me a hard time. I would really appreciate it if you could do me this favor.
Thank you in advance
Rich Ulrich
Sorry, it is too late now. After a few years of retirement, I got
rid of almost all old work projects and their documentation.
Advanced search in Google groups shows me that there was a
note posted in 2006, saying that there were new norms along
with a new release.
- Since most the bits that I saved were on 3 1/2 inch disks
that I can no longer read, I have even less old stuff than
imagined.
I don't know whether there will be anything in the archive of
the SPSS list at Nabble, but that could be another place to look.
--
Rich Ulrich
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:39:09 -0700 (PDT), black...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Art Kendall
syntax is correct with a factor analysis. Confirmatory if you know how,
but at least exploratory.
You should also use Reliability to check that the key is correct.
Of course you should also eyeball that the set of items that are put
together make substantive sense.
Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants