Individualization in quality of life measurement: instruments and approaches.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 12692766.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Quality of life (QOL) and health-related QOL (HRQOL) instruments abound in the health care literature, but many appear to measure nothing more than what in previous decades was called health status. As such, they fail to include numerous domains of life that are salient to many people, they omit items tapping into meaning and feelings of well-being, and they do not allow for individualization to take into account personal preferences. Based on a conceptualization of QOL and a corresponding 2-dimensional scheme for classification of instruments, several measures published in the literature are presented that allow for subject selection of domains, specification of standards and aspirations, and/or report of subjective reactions to status on various domains. The advantages and disadvantages of standardized versus individualized instruments are discussed, as well as methodologic questions with respect to the latter that future research needs to address.
Medical subject headings
- Attitude to Health
- Health Status Indicators
- Interviews as Topic
- Quality of Life
- Surveys and Questionnaires