Development and validation of a new global well-being outcomes rating scale for integrative medicine research

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/610356
Title:
Development and validation of a new global well-being outcomes rating scale for integrative medicine research
Author:
Bell, Iris; Cunningham, Victoria; Caspi, Opher; Meek, Paula; Ferro, Lynn
Affiliation:
Program in Integrative Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USA; Department of Psychiatry, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USA; Department of Psychology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA; Department of Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USA; Department of Surgery, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USA; Mel and Enid Zuckerman Arizona College of Public Health, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA; College of Nursing, The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Issue Date:
2004
Publisher:
BioMed Central
Citation:
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2004, 4:1 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/4/1
Journal:
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Rights:
© 2004 Bell et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
Collection Information:
This item is part of the UA Faculty Publications collection. For more information this item or other items in the UA Campus Repository, contact the University of Arizona Libraries at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:Researchers are finding limitations of currently available disease-focused questionnaire tools for outcome studies in complementary and alternative medicine/integrative medicine (CAM/IM).METHODS:Three substudies investigated the new one-item visual analogue Arizona Integrative Outcomes Scale (AIOS), which assesses self-rated global sense of spiritual, social, mental, emotional, and physical well-being over the past 24 hours and the past month. The first study tested the scale's ability to discriminate unhealthy individuals (n = 50) from healthy individuals (n = 50) in a rehabilitation outpatient clinic sample. The second study examined the concurrent validity of the AIOS by comparing ratings of global well-being to degree of psychological distress as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) in undergraduate college students (N = 458). The third study evaluated the relationships between the AIOS and positively- and negatively-valenced tools (Positive and Negative Affect Scale and the Positive States of Mind Scale) in a different sample of undergraduate students (N = 62).RESULTS:Substudy (i) Rehabilitation patients scored significantly lower than the healthy controls on both forms of the AIOS and a current global health rating. The AIOS 24-hours correlated moderately and significantly with global health (patients r = 0.50; controls r = 0.45). AIOS 1-month correlations with global health were stronger within the controls (patients r = 0.36; controls r = 0.50). Controls (r = 0.64) had a higher correlation between the AIOS 24-hour and 1-month forms than did the patients (r = 0.33), which is consistent with the presumptive improvement in the patients' condition over the previous 30 days in rehabilitation. Substudy (ii) In undergraduate students, AIOS scores were inversely related to distress ratings, as measured by the global severity index on the BSI (rAIOS24h = -0.42, rAIOS1month = -0.40). Substudy (iii) AIOS scores were significantly correlated with positive affect (rAIOS24h = 0.56, rAIOS1month = 0.57) and positive states of mind (rAIOS24h = 0.42, rAIOS1month = 0.45), and inversely correlated with negative affect (rAIOS24h = -0.41, rAIOS1month = -0.59).CONCLUSIONS:The AIOS is able to distinguish relatively sicker from relatively healthier individuals; and correlates in expected directions with a measure of distress and indicators of positive and negative affect and positive states of mind. The AIOS offers a tool for CAM/IM research that extends beyond a disease emphasis.
EISSN:
1472-6882
DOI:
10.1186/1472-6882-4-1
Keywords:
complementary and alternative medicine; well-being; global outcomes; questionnaire; validation; rehabilitation
Version:
Final published version
Additional Links:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/4/1

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorBell, Irisen
dc.contributor.authorCunningham, Victoriaen
dc.contributor.authorCaspi, Opheren
dc.contributor.authorMeek, Paulaen
dc.contributor.authorFerro, Lynnen
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-20T09:05:00Z-
dc.date.available2016-05-20T09:05:00Z-
dc.date.issued2004en
dc.identifier.citationBMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2004, 4:1 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/4/1en
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1472-6882-4-1en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/610356-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND:Researchers are finding limitations of currently available disease-focused questionnaire tools for outcome studies in complementary and alternative medicine/integrative medicine (CAM/IM).METHODS:Three substudies investigated the new one-item visual analogue Arizona Integrative Outcomes Scale (AIOS), which assesses self-rated global sense of spiritual, social, mental, emotional, and physical well-being over the past 24 hours and the past month. The first study tested the scale's ability to discriminate unhealthy individuals (n = 50) from healthy individuals (n = 50) in a rehabilitation outpatient clinic sample. The second study examined the concurrent validity of the AIOS by comparing ratings of global well-being to degree of psychological distress as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) in undergraduate college students (N = 458). The third study evaluated the relationships between the AIOS and positively- and negatively-valenced tools (Positive and Negative Affect Scale and the Positive States of Mind Scale) in a different sample of undergraduate students (N = 62).RESULTS:Substudy (i) Rehabilitation patients scored significantly lower than the healthy controls on both forms of the AIOS and a current global health rating. The AIOS 24-hours correlated moderately and significantly with global health (patients r = 0.50en
dc.description.abstractcontrols r = 0.45). AIOS 1-month correlations with global health were stronger within the controls (patients r = 0.36en
dc.description.abstractcontrols r = 0.50). Controls (r = 0.64) had a higher correlation between the AIOS 24-hour and 1-month forms than did the patients (r = 0.33), which is consistent with the presumptive improvement in the patients' condition over the previous 30 days in rehabilitation. Substudy (ii) In undergraduate students, AIOS scores were inversely related to distress ratings, as measured by the global severity index on the BSI (rAIOS24h = -0.42, rAIOS1month = -0.40). Substudy (iii) AIOS scores were significantly correlated with positive affect (rAIOS24h = 0.56, rAIOS1month = 0.57) and positive states of mind (rAIOS24h = 0.42, rAIOS1month = 0.45), and inversely correlated with negative affect (rAIOS24h = -0.41, rAIOS1month = -0.59).CONCLUSIONS:The AIOS is able to distinguish relatively sicker from relatively healthier individualsen
dc.description.abstractand correlates in expected directions with a measure of distress and indicators of positive and negative affect and positive states of mind. The AIOS offers a tool for CAM/IM research that extends beyond a disease emphasis.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/4/1en
dc.rights© 2004 Bell et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.en
dc.subjectcomplementary and alternative medicineen
dc.subjectwell-beingen
dc.subjectglobal outcomesen
dc.subjectquestionnaireen
dc.subjectvalidationen
dc.subjectrehabilitationen
dc.titleDevelopment and validation of a new global well-being outcomes rating scale for integrative medicine researchen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.eissn1472-6882en
dc.contributor.departmentProgram in Integrative Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychiatry, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Surgery, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentMel and Enid Zuckerman Arizona College of Public Health, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USAen
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Nursing, The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USAen
dc.identifier.journalBMC Complementary and Alternative Medicineen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the UA Faculty Publications collection. For more information this item or other items in the UA Campus Repository, contact the University of Arizona Libraries at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.