SF-36 predicts 13-year CHD incidence in a middle-aged Swedish general population, 2019, Nilsson et al

Thought this might be of interest to see SF-36 used elsewhere.

Open access, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11136-019-02362-y

 

Seems rather non-specific to me.

 

Uh, wat? How does that even follow? It's really a tell of how truly fragile the BPS model is that even after decades its proponents still find it necessary to randomly sprinkle "BPS is definitely good and useful and not pseudoscience because reasons" even though it's unrelated to the topic. Bit like politicians during campaigns taking questions and randomly repeating campaign slogans unrelated to any of the questions.

I'm just randomly reminded of that time Sharpe tweeted that their BPS model of ME is totally a legit thing and not an ideology. Which of course it 100% is.

It also reminds me of the Bitconnect scam and its super weird presentation where the lead scammer is in off-the-rails obvious con man mode and basically screams that Bitconnect is totally not a scam. Surprise surprise, it was a complete scam, even though he was super insistent it was not a scam and totally legit. Weird how that works.

 

Surely low SF-36 scores strongly suggest that someone is already quite limited by poor health?

Possibly those in such situations may, already, have cardiac/circulatory issues, at least in part caused by their ill health and the limitations that imposes.

So, low Sf-36 as a predictive tool? Maybe better to, I don't know, say that poor health is bad for people's health - simpler, without the sciency words, more accurate, and without someone being paid to administer a meaningless 'test' that simply says what is already known.