Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2012 | Commentary

Can quality or quality-of-life be defined?

Auteur: Ivan Barofsky

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 4/2012

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine the oft-heard concern that quality or quality-of-life cannot be defined. This concern persists today, even in the presence of countless studies that claim to be assessing quality or quality-of-life. There is obviously a disconnect here that warrants some attention, if not explanation. In this study, I summarize the extent of this disconnect and offer a number of potential explanations of why this situation exists. I review the role that operational definitions, statistical and empirical models, and content-specific definitions play in defining quality and/or quality-of-life. I conclude that none of these approaches provide a comprehensive definition of quality or quality-of-life. In its stead, I will argue that quality or quality-of-life represents a distinctive pattern of thinking. I establish this pattern by examining the cognitive–linguistic basis of these definitions and argue that when this is done it will be possible to identify an universal cognitive (hybrid) construct that describes how a person thinks about all types of qualitative assessments. The implication of this is that for a study to claim that it is defining or assessing quality or quality-of-life, it will first have to demonstrate the presence of the elements of this hybrid construct.
vorige artikel Changes in drug use are associated with health-related quality of life improvements among methadone maintenance patients with HIV/AIDS
volgende artikel Why perform a quality or quality-of-life assessment?
Voetnoten
1
This article is partially based on Chap. 1, from a book [13] entitled; “Quality—Its Definition and Assessment as Applied to the Medically Ill.”
 
2
The terms, quality, quality-of-life, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) will be distinguished throughout this article. The term “quality,” or the phrase “qualitative assessment,” will be the most general form of expression, referring to all types of qualitative assessments (e.g., quality of an object, quality of the environment, quality of working life, quality of life, and so on). I am not using the term qualitative as those who use the term to refer to a particular type of data or to “qualitative methods”, rather I am using the term to refer to a class of judgments. Of course, qualitative judgments can be studied using both qualitative and psychometric research approaches. The phrase “quality-of-life” will be differentiated from the phrase “HRQOL” in that one refers to the general population, while the other refers to persons who are medically or psychiatrically ill.
 
3
This discussion will focus mostly on the single global self-assessed items, including the self-assessed health status (SAHS) or other self-assessed quality-of-life items.
 
4
The SAHS item is sometimes referred to as a quality-of-life self-report, but it is more appropriate to consider the item as an indicator of health status.
 
5
In Chap. 8 of Barofsky [13], I make clear how a health status and HRQOL item differs. The information summarized in this paper is more about the value of a single global health status item, rather than informative about whether a single global quality-of-life item is a good predictor of mortality.
 
6
It is also possible that a culture exists where a person may not have any experience with attaching numbers to feelings or other types of states. This would only be relevant if it could also be demonstrated that the members of this culture could not learn to do this task. If this was so, then providing a means whereby these people could be assessed would remain an issue.
 
Literatuur
1.
Ferrans, C. E. (2005). Definitions and conceptual models of quality of life. In J. Lipscomb, C. C. Gotay, & C. Synder (Eds.), Outcomes assessment in cancer (pp. 14–30). NY: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Hunt, S. M. (1991). The problem of quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 6, 205–226.
3.
Nord, E., Arnesen, T., Menzel, P., & Pinto, J.-L. (2001). Towards a more restricted use of the term “quality of life”. News Letter Quality of Life, 26, 3–4.
4.
Rapley, M. (2003). Quality of life research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Editorial. (1995). Quality of life and clinical trials. Lancet, 346(8966), 1–2.
6.
Wolfensberger, W. (1994). Lets hang up “quality of life” as a hopeless term. In D. Goode (Ed.), Quality of life for persons with disabilities: International perspectives and issues (pp. 285–321). Cambridge: Brookline.
7.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2000). Measuring healthy days: Population assessment of health related quality of life. Atlanta, GA: Center for Disease Control.
8.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1916). The quality of American life. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
Feinstein, A. R. (1981). Clinimetric perspective. Journal of Chronical Disease, 40, 635–640.CrossRef
10.
Feinstein, A. R. (1981). Clinimetrics. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale.
11.
Gill, T. M., & Feinstein, A. R. (1994). A critical appraisal of the quality of quality of life measurements. Journal of Medical Association, 26, 619–626.CrossRef
12.
Reeves, C. A., & Bednar, D. A. (1994). Defining quality: Alternatives and implications. Academy of Management Review, 19, 419–445.
13.
Barofsky, I. (in press). Quality: Its definition and assessment as applied to the medically ill. New York, NY: Springer.
14.
Loehlin, J. C. (2004). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
Torrance, G. W., Furlong, W., Feeny, D., & Boyle, M. (1995). Multi-attribute preference functions: Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics, 7, 503–520.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Kaplan, R. M., & Anderson, J. P. (1990). The general health policy model: An integrated approach. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of life assessments in clinical trials. New York, NY: Ravens.
17.
Bergner, M., Bobbitt, R. A., Carter, W. B., & Gilson, B. S. (1981). The sickness impact profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care, 19, 787–805.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Fryback, D. G., Palta, M., Cherepanov, D., Bolt, D., et al. (2009). Comparison of 5 health-related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Medical Decision Making. First published online October 20, 2009. Print edition: Jan–Feb 2010. doi:10.​1177/​0272989X09347016​.
19.
Nord, E., Daniels, N., & Kamlett, M. (2009). QALYs: Some challenges. Values Health, 12(S1), S10–S15.CrossRef
20.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.
21.
Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38, 303–328.CrossRef
22.
Haase, J. E., & Braden, C. J. (1998). Guidelines for achieving clarity of concepts related to quality of life. In C. R. King & P. S. Hinds (Eds.), Quality of life: From nursing to patient perspectives, theory, research, practice (pp. 13–54). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
23.
Joyce, C. R. B. (1988). Quality of life: The state of the art in clinical assessment. In S. W. Walker & R. M. Rosser (Eds.), Quality of life assessment and application (pp. 119–169). Lancaster, PA: MTP Press.
24.
Ruta, D. A., Garratt, A. M., Leng, M., Russell, I. T., et al. (1994). A new approach to the measurement of quality of life: The patient generated inventory (PGI). Medical Care, 32, 149–166.CrossRef
25.
Donaldson, G. W., & Moinpour, C. M. (2002). Individual differences in quality-of-life treatment response. Medical Care, 40(Suppl. 6), III39–III53.PubMed
26.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representation of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104, 573–605.
27.
Binder, J. R., Westbury, C. F., McKiernan, K. A., Possing, E. T., et al. (2005). Distinct brain systems for processing concrete and abstract concepts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 905–917.CrossRef
28.
Fechner, G. T. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Hartel.
29.
Campbell, N. R. (1920). Physics the elements. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
Bridgman, P. W. (1927). The logic of modern physics. New York, NY: Macmillan.
31.
Ferguson, A., Myers, C. S., Bartlett, R. J., Banister, H., et al. (1940). Final report of the committee appointed to consider and report upon the possibility of quantitative estimates of sensory events. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 2, 331–349.
32.
Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 36, 221–263.CrossRef
33.
Luce, R. D., & Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.CrossRef
34.
Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement, Vol. 1. New York, NY: Academic Press.
35.
Suppes, P., Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., & Tversky, A. (1989). Foundations of measurement, Vol. 2. New York, NY: Academic Press.
36.
Luce, R. D., Krantz, D. H., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1990). Foundations of measurement, Vol. 3. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
37.
Borsboom, D. (2005). Measuring the mind: Conceptual issues in contemporary psychometrics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
38.
Cliff, N. (1992). Abstract measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40, 153–193.
39.
Fraser, C. O. (1980). Measurement in psychology. British Journal of Psychology, 71, 23–34.CrossRef
40.
Kline, P. (1998). The new psychometrics: Science, psychology and measurement. London, UK: Routledge.
41.
Michell, J. (1986). Measurement scales and statistics: A class of paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 398–407.CrossRef
42.
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.
Benyamini, Y., & Idler, E. L. (1999). Community studies reporting association between self-rated health and mortality: Additional studies, 1995–1998. Research on Aging, 21, 392–401.CrossRef
44.
Idler, E. L. (1999). Self-assessment of health: The next stage of studies. Research on Aging, 21, 381–391.
45.
Idler, E. L., & Benyamini, Y. (1991). Self-rated health and mortality: A review of 27 community studies. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 21–31.CrossRef
46.
Idler, E., Leventhal, H., McLaughlin, J., & Leventhal, E. (2004). In sickness but not in health: Self-ratings, identity and mortality. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 454, 336–356.CrossRef
47.
Ganz, P. A., Lee, J. J., & Siau, J. (1991). Quality of life assessment. An independent prognostic variables for survival in lung cancer. Cancer, 61, 3131–3135.CrossRef
48.
Kaplan, M., Berthelot, J.-M., Feeny, D., McFarland, B. H., et al. (2001). The predictive validity of health-related quality of life measures; mortality in a longitudinal population-based study. Quality of Life Research, 16, 1539–1546.CrossRef
49.
Anthony, T., Hyman, L. S., Rosen, D., Kim, L., et al. (2003). The association of pretreatment health-related quality of life with surgical complications for patients undergoing open surgical resection for colorectal cancer. Annals of Surgery, 238, 690–696.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Efficace, F., Bottomley, A., Coens, C., Van Steen, K., et al. (2006). Does a patient’s self-reported health-related quality of life predict survival beyond key biomedical data in advanced colorectal cancer? European Journal of Cancer, 42, 42–49.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Blazeby, J. M., Brookes, S. T., & Alderson, D. (2001). The prognostic value of quality of life scores during treatment for oesophageal cancer. Gut, 49, 221–230.CrossRef
52.
Blazeby, J. M., Metcalfe, C., Nicklin, J., Barham, C. P., et al. (2005). Association between quality of life scores and short -term outcome after surgery for cancer of the oesophagus or gastric cardia. British Journal of Surgery, 92, 1501–1502.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Can quality or quality-of-life be defined?
Auteur
Ivan Barofsky
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2012
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 4/2012
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9961-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2012

Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist

  • Open Access

Use of the PedsQL in childhood intermittent exotropia: estimates of feasibility, internal consistency reliability and parent–child agreement

Psychometric properties of instruments to measure the quality of end-of-life care and dying for long-term care residents with dementia

  • Open Access

Influence of chronic diseases on long-term change in physical health: a consultation–survey linkage cohort study in general practice

Measuring health-related quality-of-life for Alzheimer’s disease using the general public

Assessment of the psychological burden associated with pruritus in hemodialysis patients using the kidney disease quality of life short form