Validity and Reliability of the Updated CDC Worksite Health ScoreCard

Roemer, Enid Chung; Kent, Karen; Mummert, Amanda; McCleary, Katherine; Palmer, Jacquelyn B.; Lang, Jason E.; Koffman, Dyann Matson; Goetzel, Ron Z.

doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000001660

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…25,26 Good measures are becoming available to evaluate the organizational health of a company, which can capture such elements as its culture, leadership support, programming elements, and feedback loops. [27][28][29] Among the hypotheses to be tested is whether after controlling for confounders, healthy company cultures improve employees' health risk profiles and reduce medical spending. Early results suggest that improving a company's culture of health predicts reductions in employees' health risks and health-care utilization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Modifiable Health Risk Factors and Employees’ Medical Costs—An Update

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To estimate the relationship between employees’ health risks and health-care costs to inform health promotion program design. Design: An observational study of person-level health-care claims and health risk assessment (HRA) data that used regression models to estimate the relationship between 10 modifiable risk factors and subsequent year 1 health-care costs. Setting: United States. Participants: The sample included active, full-time, adult employees continuously enrolled in employer-sponsored health insurance plans contributing to IBM MarketScan Research Databases who completed an HRA. Study criteria were met by 135 219 employees from 11 employers. Measures: Ten modifiable risk factors and individual sociodemographic and health characteristics were included in the models as independent variables. Five settings of health-care costs were outcomes in addition to total expenditures. Analysis: After building the analytic file, we estimated generalized linear models and conducted postestimation bootstrapping. Results: Health-care costs were significantly higher for employees at higher risk for blood glucose, obesity, stress, depression, and physical inactivity (all at P < .0001) than for those at lower risk. Similar cost differentials were found when specific health-care services were examined. Conclusion: Employers may achieve cost savings in the short run by implementing comprehensive health promotion programs that focus on decreasing multiple health risks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Modifiable Health Risk Factors and Employees’ Medical Costs—An Update

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ScoreCard provides a valid and reliable tool for measuring and guiding improvements to the implementation of evidence-based WHP interventions. 5,6 However, its 18-category, 154-question scope can be daunting for a large employer lacking uniformity of structure, culture, priorities, and resources across the organization. Compared to the average size employer using the ScoreCard, JHM is very large.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ScoreCard provides a valid and reliable tool for measuring the number of evidence-based WHP interventions. 5,6 The ScoreCard can be used as a framework for guiding improvements to the number and level of impact of evidence-based WHP interventions. 11,12,15…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the CDC Worksite Health ScoreCard to Promote Organizational Change

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To measure the impact of tying adoption of evidence-based worksite health promotion (WHP) interventions to annual organizational strategic objectives, as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Worksite Health ScoreCard (ScoreCard). Design: A prospective cohort study following Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM) affiliates against industry-specific and large employer benchmarks from 2016-2020. Settings: JHM, the largest private employer in Maryland with facilities in Florida and the District of Columbia. Subjects: Twelve JHM affiliates representing over 40,000 employees. Intervention: A strategic objective was established annually based on the ScoreCard and organizational priorities. Measures: JHM affiliates measured their WHP efforts annually using the ScoreCard. CDC industry-specific and large employer benchmarks were collected for comparison. Analysis: ScoreCard data was assessed annually to measure deviations from CDC benchmarks, determine whether strategic objectives were met, and inform additional annual objectives. Results: JHM demonstrated improvement from 8.9 percentage points above industry-specific and 3.4 percentage points below large employer benchmarks in 2016, to 26.4 percentage points above industry-specific and 21.8 percentage points above large employer benchmarks in 2020. Conclusion: Large employers face unique challenges in implementing WHP programs. Our study suggests embedding health promotion in annual strategic objectives may alleviate these challenges by prioritizing the goal and ensuring adequate resources to be successful. There are however, some limitations on using benchmarking data for comparison.

show abstract

“…Elissa Rosenbaum, CEBS 1 , Jessica Grossmeier, PhD, MPH 2 , Mary Imboden, PhD 2,3 , and Steven Noeldner, MS, PhD 1…”

Section: The Hero Health and Well-being Best Practices Scorecard In Cmentioning

confidence: 99%