For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
37
views
13
references
 Top references
cited by
193
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      213
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Quality of life (QOL) is an important concept in the field of health and medicine. QOL is a complex concept that is interpreted and defined differently within and between disciplines, including the fields of health and medicine. The aims of this study were to systematically review the literature on QOL in medicine and health research and to describe the country of origin, target groups, instruments, design, and conceptual issues.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Critique on the conceptualisation of quality of life: a review and evaluation of different conceptual approaches.

          Werner Budts, Sabina De Geest, Philip Moons (2006)
          Over the past decades, the concept of quality of life has been of paramount importance for evaluating the quality and outcome of health care. Despite its importance, there is still no consensus on the definition or proper measurement of quality of life. Several concept analyses of quality of life have been published. However, they appear to have had a rather limited impact on how empirical studies are conducted. Therefore, we present an overview and critique of different conceptualisations of quality of life, with the ultimate goal of making quality of life a less ambiguous concept. We also describe six conceptual problems. These problems were used as criteria to evaluate the appropriateness of different conceptualisations. This evaluation suggests that defining quality of life in terms of life satisfaction is most appropriate, because this definition successfully deals with all the conceptual problems discussed. The result of our concept evaluation was not surprising for it corroborated the results of several concept analyses and the findings of a structural equation modelling study. Based on the findings revealed by our review, we propose that the scientific community should revitalise the conceptual discussion on quality of life. Furthermore, our findings can assist researchers in developing more rigourous quality-of-life research.
          Article 0 comments Cited 120 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Generic health-related quality-of-life assessment in children and adolescents: methodological considerations.

            Ralf Wetzel, Monika Bullinger, Nora Wille … (2005)
            The health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) of children and adolescents is increasingly considered a relevant topic for research. Instruments to assess quality of life in children and adolescents of a generic as well as disease- or condition-specific nature are being developed and applied in epidemiological surveys, clinical studies, quality assurance and health economics. This paper attempts to give an overview on the state of the art of HR-QOL assessment in children as it relates to methodological and conceptual challenges. Instruments available in international or cross-cultural research to assess HR-QOL in generic terms were identified and described according to psychometric data provided and the width of application. In an initial literature search, several challenges in the assessment of child and adolescent HR-QOL were identified, ranging from conceptual and methodological to practical aspects. Seven specific major issues were considered: (i) What are the dimensions of HR-QOL relevant for children and adolescents, and do suitable instruments for their measurement exist? (ii) Can these dimensions be collected in a cross-culturally comparable way? (iii) What advantages and disadvantages do self-rated versus externally evaluated HR-QOL measurements of children and adolescents have? (iv) How can HR-QOL be assessed in an age-appropriate way? (v) What are the advantages and disadvantages of disease-specific and generic data collection? (vi) What advantages and disadvantages do profile and index instruments have? (vii) How can HR-QOL be connected with utility- preference values? In a second literature search we identified nine generic HR-QOL instruments and four utility health state classification systems that complied with the prespecified inclusion criteria. It was concluded that (i) HR-QOL instruments are available to assess the dimensions of the construct relevant to children and adolescents; (ii) provided that an instrument was constructed in an appropriate way, the dimensions of HR-QOL can be measured in an interculturally comparable manner; (iii) the HR-QOL of children and adolescents can and should be ascertained by self-rating; (iv) the measurement instruments used have to consider maturity and cognitive development; (v) only generic quality-of-life instruments allow for an assessment of HR-QOL in both healthy and chronically ill children and adolescents; (vi) the representation of HR-QOL achieved through a singular index value is connected to strict psychometric conditions: the index instrument has to be tailored to these psychometric conditions; (vii) how far utility measures are employable with children and adolescents has to be investigated in further studies. The problem aspects identified indicate the necessity for further research. Nevertheless, instruments for assessing the HR-QOL of children and adolescents can be identified that meet the requirements mentioned above.
            Article 0 comments Cited 84 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Assessing health related quality of life in medicine. An overview over concepts, methods and applications in international research.

              Monika Bullinger (2001)
              Health-related quality of life is increasingly accepted as relevant endpoint in medicine. Available work pertains to development and psychometric testing of measurement instruments. Theoretical papers are largely missing, inclusion of instruments in clinical trials, however, has begun now, especially in oncology and cardiology. Based on a review of the available literature, areas of application of quality of life research are described. Focus of attention are conceptual, methodological and practical challenges as well as the contribution of quality of life research to evaluating the results of medical treatment.
              Article 0 comments Cited 33 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Qual Life Res
                Title: Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
                Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                ISSN (Electronic): 1573-2649
                ISSN (Print): 0962-9343
                Publication date (Electronic): Oct 2019
                Volume: 28
                Issue: 10
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Faculty of Health- and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, P.O Box 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway. Kristin.haraldstad@uia.no.
                [2 ] Department of Health Sciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1084, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway.
                [3 ] Faculty of Health, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, St. Olavs plass, P.O. Box 4, 0130, Oslo, Norway.
                [4 ] Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences (HVL), P.O. Box 7030, 5020, Bergen, Norway.
                [5 ] Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, P.O. Box 6050, Langnes, Tromsø, Norway.
                [6 ] University Hospital of North Norway, P.O. Box 100, 9038, Tromsø, Norway.
                [7 ] Faculty of Health Studies, VID Specialized University, Mailbox 184, Vinderen, NO, 0319, Norway.
                [8 ] Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, P.O. Box 8600, Forus, Norway.
                [9 ] Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Leuven, P.O. Box 7001, Kapucijnenvoer, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
                [10 ] Haukeland University Hospital, P.O. Box 1400, 5021, Bergen, Norway.
                [11 ] Faculty of Health- and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, P.O Box 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
                [12 ] Department of Clinical Research, SSHF, P.O. Box 416, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
                Article
                Publisher Item ID: 10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9
                DOI: 10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9
                PMC ID: 6761255
                PubMed ID: 31187410
                SO-VID: dc9c9e11-0392-4c3c-b615-920a2950d8bf
                History

                Keywords: Health-related quality of life,Systematic review,Quality of life
                Data availability:
                Keywords: Health-related quality of life, Systematic review, Quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content213

                See all similar

                Cited by192

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors499

                See all reference authors