Literature DB >> 19142744

Meaning behind measurement: self-comparisons affect responses to health-related quality of life questionnaires.

Clare Robertson1, Anne L Langston, Sally Stapley, Elaine McColl, Marion K Campbell, William D Fraser, Graeme Maclennan, Peter L Selby, Stuart H Ralston, Peter M Fayers.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The subjective nature of quality of life is particularly pertinent to the domain of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) research. The extent to which participants' responses are affected by subjective information and personal reference frames is unknown. This study investigated how an elderly population living with a chronic metabolic bone disorder evaluated self-reported quality of life.
METHODS: Participants (n = 1,331) in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial for the treatment of Paget's disease completed annual HRQOL questionnaires, including the SF-36, EQ-5D and HAQ. Supplementary questions were added to reveal implicit reference frames used when making HRQOL evaluations. Twenty-one participants (11 male, 10 female, aged 59-91 years) were interviewed retrospectively about their responses to the supplementary questions, using cognitive interviewing techniques and semi-structured topic guides.
RESULTS: The interviews revealed that participants used complex and interconnected reference frames to promote response shift when making quality of life evaluations. The choice of reference frame often reflected external factors unrelated to individual health. Many participants also stated that they were unclear whether to report general or disease-related HRQOL.
CONCLUSIONS: It is important, especially in clinical trials, to provide instructions clarifying whether 'quality of life' refers to disease-related HRQOL. Information on self-comparison reference frames is necessary for the interpretation of responses to questions about HRQOL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19142744     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-008-9435-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  13 in total

1.  Understanding self-rated health.

Authors:  Peter M Fayers; Mirjam A G Sprangers
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-01-19       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Measuring quality of life: Is quality of life determined by expectations or experience?

Authors:  A J Carr; B Gibson; P G Robinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-05-19

3.  EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.

Authors: 
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Comparison of two approaches to measuring change in health status in rheumatoid arthritis: the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and modified HAQ.

Authors:  S Ziebland; R Fitzpatrick; C Jenkinson; A Mowat; A Mowat
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 19.103

5.  Clinical determinants of quality of life in Paget's disease of bone.

Authors:  A L Langston; M K Campbell; W D Fraser; G Maclennan; P Selby; S H Ralston
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2007-01-04       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project.

Authors:  J E Ware; B Gandek
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Misimagining the unimaginable: the disability paradox and health care decision making.

Authors:  Peter A Ubel; George Loewenstein; Norbert Schwarz; Dylan Smith
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.267

8.  The disability paradox: high quality of life against all odds.

Authors:  G L Albrecht; P J Devlieger
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Self-rated health. Comparisons between three different measures. Results from a population study.

Authors:  I Eriksson; A L Undén; S Elofsson
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Implicit self-comparisons against others could bias quality of life assessments.

Authors:  Peter M Fayers; Anne L Langston; Clare Robertson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  6 in total

1.  Putting the text back into context: toward increased use of mixed methods for quality of life research.

Authors:  Lena Ring; Cynthia R Gross; Elaine McColl
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Quality of Life and Value Assessment in Health Care.

Authors:  Alicia Hall
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2020-03

3.  Death by a thousand cuts: The health implications of black respectability politics.

Authors:  Hedwig Lee; Margaret Takako Hicken
Journal:  Souls       Date:  2016-12-14

4.  Response shift effect on gastrointestinal quality of life index after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Hon-Yi Shi; King-Teh Lee; Hao-Hsien Lee; Yih-Huei Uen; Chong-Chi Chiu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-10       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Listening to the elephant in the room: response-shift effects in clinical trials research.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; I-Chan Huang; Gudrun Rohde; Richard L Skolasky
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2022-09-30

6.  Living with chronic illness scale: international validation of a new self-report measure in Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Leire Ambrosio; Mari Carmen Portillo; Carmen Rodríguez-Blázquez; Mayela Rodriguez-Violante; Juan Carlos Martínez Castrillo; Víctor Campos Arillo; Nélida Susana Garretto; Tomoko Arakaki; Marcos Serrano Dueñas; Mario Álvarez; Ivonne Pedroso Ibáñez; Ana Carvajal; Pablo Martínez-Martín
Journal:  NPJ Parkinsons Dis       Date:  2016-10-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.