Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2002 Jun 15;324(7351):1417.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1417.

Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures

Andrew Garratt  1 , Louise Schmidt, Anne Mackintosh, Ray Fitzpatrick
Affiliations
Review

Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures

Andrew Garratt et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the growth of quality of life measures and to examine the availability of measures across specialties.

Design: Systematic searches of electronic databases to identify developmental and evaluative work relating to health outcome measures assessed by patients.

Main outcome measures: Types of measures: disease or population specific, dimension specific, generic, individualised, and utility. Specialties in which measures have been developed and evaluated.

Results: 3921 reports that described the development and evaluation of patient assessed measures met the inclusion criteria. Of those that were classifiable, 1819 (46%) were disease or population specific, 865 (22%) were generic, 690 (18%) were dimension specific, 409 (10%) were utility, and 62 (1%) were individualised measures. During 1990-9 the number of new reports of development and evaluation rose from 144 to 650 per year. Reports of disease specific measures rose exponentially. Over 30% of evaluations were in cancer, rheumatology and musculoskeletal disorders, and older people's health. The generic measures--SF-36, sickness impact profile, and Nottingham health profile--accounted for 612 (16%) reports.

Conclusions: In some specialties there are numerous measures of quality of life and little standardisation. Primary research through the concurrent evaluation of measures and secondary research through structured reviews of measures are prerequisites for standardisation. Recommendations for the selection of patient assessed measures of health outcome are needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Number of reports for four main types of measure by year
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton M, Jones DR. Criteria for assessing patient based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. In: Stevens A, Abrams K, Brazier J, Fitzpatrick R, Lilford R, editors. The advanced handbook of methods in evidence based healthcare. London: Sage; 2001. pp. 181–194.
    1. Sanders C, Egger M, Donovan J, Tallon D, Frankel S. Reporting on quality of life in randomised controlled trials: bibliographic study. BMJ. 1998;317:1191–1194. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2:1–74. - PubMed
    1. Hayes JA, Black NA, Jenkinson C, Young JD, Rowan KM, Daly K, et al. Outcome measures for adult critical care: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4:1–111. - PubMed
    1. Baker GA, Hesdon B, Marson AG. Quality of life and behavioral outcome measures in randomized controlled trials of antiepileptic drugs: a systematic review of methodology and reporting standards. Epilepsia. 2000;41:1357–1363. - PubMed

Publication types