Questions? Call 800-624-6242 About | Ordering | New Menu | Items in cart [0] SEARCH

PAPERBACK price:$15.00 add to cart Rights & Permissions Free PDF Access Sign in to download PDF book and chapters Free Resources PDF SUMMARY Display this book on your site! Related Titles The Dynamics of Disability:Measuring and Monitoring Disability for Social Security Programs Disability Evaluation Study Design:First Interim Report Other Related Titles Review of the Disability Evaluation Study Design: Third Interim Report (1999) Institute of Medicine (IOM) Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (CBASSE) Citation Manager Export the bibliographic data for this book in your chosen format Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Citation Manager . "References." Review of the Disability Evaluation Study Design: Third Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1999. Please select a format: Page 23   E-mail Share on facebook Facebook Share on delicious Delicious Share on stumbleupon Stumble Share on twitter Twitter More Sharing ServicesMore The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. References Bassett, S.S., Magaziner, J., and Hebel, J.R. Reliability of Proxy Response on Mental Health Indices for Aged, Community-Dwelling Women. Psychology of Aging 5(1): 127-132, 1990. Epstein, A.M., Hall, J.A., Tognetti, J., Son, L.H., and Conant, Jr., L. Using Proxies to Evaluate Quality of Life. Can They Provide Valid Information about Patients' Health Status and Satisfaction with Medical Care? Medical Care 27(3 Suppl.):S91-S98, 1989. Forsyth, B.H., and Lessler, J.T. Cognitive Laboratory Methods: A Taxonomy. In Biemer, P.P., Groves, R.M., Lyberg, L.E., Mathiowetz, N.A., and Sudman, S., eds., Measurement Errors in Surveys. New York: Wiley, 1991. Grootendorst, P.V., Feeny, D.H., and Furlong, W. Does it Matter Whom and How You Ask? Inter-and Intra-Rater Agreement in the Ontario Health Survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 50(2): 127-135, 1997. Hays, R.D., Vickrey, B.G., Hermann, B.P., Perrine, K., et al. Agreement Between Self-Reports and Proxy Reports of Quality of Life in Epilepsy Patients . Quality of Life Research 4(2): 159-168, 1995. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Disability Evaluation Study Design: First Interim Report. Institute of Medicine. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1997. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Measuring Functional Capacity and Work Requirements: Summary of a Workshop. Institute of Medicine. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1999. Long, K., Sudha, S., and Mutran, E.J. Elder-Proxy Agreement Concerning the Functional Status and Medical History of the Older Person: The Impact of Caregiver Burden and Depressive Symptomology. Journal of the American Geriatric Society 46(9): 1103-1111, 1998. Magaziner, J., Zimmerman, S.I., Gruber-Baldini, A.L., Hebel, J.R., and Fox, K.M. Proxy Reporting in Five Areas of Functional Status. Comparison with Self-Reports and Observations of Performance. American Journal of Epidemiology 146(5):418-428, 1997. Sneeuw, K.C., Aaronson, N.K., de Haan, R.J., and Limburg, M. Assessing Quality of Life After Stroke. The Value and Limitations of Proxy Ratings. Stroke 28(8): 1541-1549, 1997. Sneeuw, K.C., Aaronson, N.K., Sprangers, M.A., Detmar, S.B., Wever, L.D., and Schornagel, J.H. Comparison of Patient and Proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 Ratings in Assessing the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 51 (7):617-631, 1998. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M., and Schwartz, N. Thinking about Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. Westat, Inc. Disability Evaluation Study-Instruments and Procedures: Task 4, Report 1. Submitted to Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C., June 1999a. (Unpublished.) Page 23 Front Matter (R1-R8) 1 Introduction (1-2) 2 Overview of the Disability Evaluation Study (3-11) 3 Committee Reactions (12-21) 4 Concluding Comments (22-22) References (23-24) Appendix: Review of the Social Security Administration's Disability Decision Process Research: Study Mandate (25-25) Acronyms and Abbreviations (26-26) Biographical Sketches of Committee Members (27-30)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 23
Review of Disability Evaluation Study Design: Third Interim Report References Bassett, S.S., Magaziner, J., and Hebel, J.R. Reliability of Proxy Response on Mental Health Indices for Aged, Community-Dwelling Women. Psychology of Aging 5(1): 127-132, 1990. Epstein, A.M., Hall, J.A., Tognetti, J., Son, L.H., and Conant, Jr., L. Using Proxies to Evaluate Quality of Life. Can They Provide Valid Information about Patients' Health Status and Satisfaction with Medical Care? Medical Care 27(3 Suppl.):S91-S98, 1989. Forsyth, B.H., and Lessler, J.T. Cognitive Laboratory Methods: A Taxonomy. In Biemer, P.P., Groves, R.M., Lyberg, L.E., Mathiowetz, N.A., and Sudman, S., eds., Measurement Errors in Surveys. New York: Wiley, 1991. Grootendorst, P.V., Feeny, D.H., and Furlong, W. Does it Matter Whom and How You Ask? Inter-and Intra-Rater Agreement in the Ontario Health Survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 50(2): 127-135, 1997. Hays, R.D., Vickrey, B.G., Hermann, B.P., Perrine, K., et al. Agreement Between Self-Reports and Proxy Reports of Quality of Life in Epilepsy Patients . Quality of Life Research 4(2): 159-168, 1995. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Disability Evaluation Study Design: First Interim Report. Institute of Medicine. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1997. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Measuring Functional Capacity and Work Requirements: Summary of a Workshop. Institute of Medicine. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1999. Long, K., Sudha, S., and Mutran, E.J. Elder-Proxy Agreement Concerning the Functional Status and Medical History of the Older Person: The Impact of Caregiver Burden and Depressive Symptomology. Journal of the American Geriatric Society 46(9): 1103-1111, 1998. Magaziner, J., Zimmerman, S.I., Gruber-Baldini, A.L., Hebel, J.R., and Fox, K.M. Proxy Reporting in Five Areas of Functional Status. Comparison with Self-Reports and Observations of Performance. American Journal of Epidemiology 146(5):418-428, 1997. Sneeuw, K.C., Aaronson, N.K., de Haan, R.J., and Limburg, M. Assessing Quality of Life After Stroke. The Value and Limitations of Proxy Ratings. Stroke 28(8): 1541-1549, 1997. Sneeuw, K.C., Aaronson, N.K., Sprangers, M.A., Detmar, S.B., Wever, L.D., and Schornagel, J.H. Comparison of Patient and Proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 Ratings in Assessing the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 51 (7):617-631, 1998. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M., and Schwartz, N. Thinking about Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. Westat, Inc. Disability Evaluation Study-Instruments and Procedures: Task 4, Report 1. Submitted to Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C., June 1999a. (Unpublished.)

OCR for page 24
Review of Disability Evaluation Study Design: Third Interim Report Westat, Inc. Disability Evaluation Study-Final Sample Design Report: Task 4, Report 2. (Includes Pilot Study Design.) Submitted to Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C., June 1999b. (Unpublished.) Westat, Inc. Disability Evaluation Study-Plans to Meet Response Rate Goals: Task 4, Report 3. Submitted to Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C., June 1999c. (Unpublished.)

Representative terms from entire chapter:

security administration