The importance of methodological rigour in quality-of-life studies

Moons, Philip

doi:10.1016/j.ejcts.2009.07.027

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is lower than that reported in the survey of Bratt and Moons [7], which found that 27% of the studies of congenital health disease from 2005 to 2014 provided a definition of QOL. A definition of QOL should state clearly what the authors mean by QOL and how it is related to other concepts [18]. The criteria fulfilled most frequently in our study were stating the domains of QOL to be measured, giving a reason for choosing the instruments used, and aggregating the results from multiple items.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeQuality 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.MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify research studies on QOL and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The databases Scopus, which includes Embase and MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for articles published during one random week in November 2016. The ten predefined criteria of Gill and Feinstein were used to evaluate the conceptual and methodological rigor.ResultsQOL research is international and involves a variety of target groups, research designs, and QOL measures. According to the criteria of Gill and Feinstein, the results show that only 13% provided a definition of QOL, 6% distinguished QOL from HRQOL. The most frequently fulfilled criteria were: (i) stating the domains of QOL to be measured; (ii) giving a reason for choosing the instruments used; and (iii) aggregating the results from multiple items.ConclusionQOL is an important endpoint in medical and health research, and QOL research involves a variety of patient groups and different research designs. Based on the current evaluation of the methodological and conceptual clarity of QOL research, we conclude that the majority QOL studies in health and medicine have conceptual and methodological challenges.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nursing Care for Patients with Congenital Heart Disease During Follow-Up: Transfer and Transition

Flocco

Goossens

2018

Congenital Heart Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reply to Moons

Gahl

Loup

Kadner

2010

European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

QOL is poor. Too often, the SF-36 is used as a health-related QOL instrument, whereas it says more about the perceived health status of the respondents. Second, the authors correctly explain in the methods section that the raw scores for each of the eight dimensions of the SF-36 have to be transformed into a score ranging from 0 to 100 [1]. However, in the results, they report SF-36 scores that are higher than 100. In the discussion section, they argued, 'the authors did not transform the raw SF-36 values, allowing age-and gendermatched comparison [1].' It is surprising that the authors use this comparison as an argument for not transforming the dimension scores. There is a plethora of articles in which the dimension scores were transformed, but still compared with matched data from normative groups. The fact that the scores were not transformed to a scale from 0 to 100 might be responsible for their findings being aberrant from the previous studies that have used the SF-36 in adults with congenital heart disease. Third, the SF-36 contains eight dimensions. These dimensions can be used to compute a physical component and mental component score. In the Loup study, also an overall QOL score was calculated. Computing such an overall SF-36 score is not advocated and seems inappropriate because constructs that are conceptually different are mixed. All these factors have potentially hampered the internal validity of the study.I join the authors in their statement that QOL research is needed to design, adapt and optimise the specific needs and complex follow-up of this special group of patients [1]. QOL studies require, however, a firm conceptual background and the use of rigorous research methods.

show abstract

The importance of methodological rigour in quality-of-life studies

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

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

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

Nursing Care for Patients with Congenital Heart Disease During Follow-Up: Transfer and Transition

Reply to Moons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About