The Relationship Between Objective Life Status and Subjective Life Satisfaction With Quality of Life

Abstract

A locally developed quality of life inventory was used to examine the relationship between objective life status and subjective satisfaction with quality of life in 8,550 participants from Hunan, China. The inventory included 112 items in 4 dimensions-physical health, psychological health, social functional status, and living conditions. Objective life status was the principal factor affecting subjective satisfaction, but discrepancies were found in some participants, especially when objective status was at the extremes of the distribution. Young, urban, or more educated participants with higher scores on objective status often had lower subjective satisfaction scores in spite of comparatively high objective status scores. Participants who ranked lower on objective status (old, rural, or less educated people) sometimes ranked higher in subjective satisfaction. Scores for subjective satisfaction always showed a normal distribution, whatever the objective satisfaction of the population. Divergence between individual objective status and subjective satisfaction was associated with hierarchy of life needs and the reference standards used for the comparison.

Impact of newly diagnosed breast cancer on quality of life among Chinese women

“…The second group included disease-and treatment-related factors such as stage of breast cancer at the time of primary diagnosis, co-mobility, estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, tamoxifen use, and immunotherapy. The QOL of both breast cancer patients and healthy subjects was assessed by using the General Quality of Life Inventory-74 (GQOLI-74), which has been demonstrated to have a satisfactory level of reliability, validity, and sensitivity in the Chinese population [14][15][16]. This questionnaire comprises a total of 74 items that can be grouped into 20 facets including a perceived global health status/QOL assessment and covers four domains.…”

Quality of Life After Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Survival

“…This inventory was created specifically for use in the Chinese population and was based on the WHO Quality of Life Assessment Instrument. The QOL assessment provided by this instrument has been shown to have satisfactory levels of reliability and validity, 22,23 and its utility among breast cancer patients has been previously described. 24,25 The inventory comprises 74 items that can be classified into 20 facets that are then categorized into a global health status/QOL assessment and the following four domains: (1) physical well-being (sleep and energy, pain and physical discomfort, eating functioning, sexual functioning, sensory functioning, and capability of daily living), (2) psychological well-being (psychological distress, negative feelings, positive feelings, cognitive functioning, and body/ self-image), (3) social well-being (social support, interpersonal relationships, work and study capacity, recreational and leisure activities, and marriage and family), and (4) material well-being (housing situation, community services, living environment, and financial situation).…”

Inter‐rater and test–retest reliability of the Taiwanese rehabilitation functional scale

“…ICCs were calculated using one-way ANOVA to produce the mean square (MS) data to factor out the variance (Cicchetti, 1976;Jelles et al, 1995;Lo, 1996). The criterion for acceptable ICC is above 0.75 (Li et al, 1998). The formula for calculation of ICC is as follows:…”