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
. 1988;26(4):425-34.
doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(88)90311-5.

Evaluating the impact of medical treatment on the quality of life: a 5-year update

Affiliations
Review

Evaluating the impact of medical treatment on the quality of life: a 5-year update

J G Hollandsworth Jr. Soc Sci Med. 1988.

Abstract

A comparison of the studies investigating the impact of medical care on quality of life over a recent 5-year period (1980-1984) with those appearing during the preceding 5 years from 1975 to 1979 [1]reveals; that (a) 3 times as many (69 as compared to 23) appeared during the time span, that (b) almost two-thirds (60%) of the recent studies included a subjective measure of quality of life as compared to only 1 in 10 for the previous 5-year period, but that (c) one-shot, case studies designs still predominate. On the other hand, (d) the use of control groups doubled from 1981 to the present, although (c) the majority of studies continues to use samples of convenience (e.g. consecutive patients or treatment survivors) rather than employing random assignments or random sampling. Nevertheless, (f) the average size of samples has doubled from 90 to 178, and (g) whereas almost all of the studies in the earlier review concluded that the intervention being studied improved quality of life, now approx. 1 in 5 report negative outcomes with another 30% reporting mixed results. It is concluded that in spite of increasing methodological sophistication, investigation of the impact of medical care on quality of life will be hindered until there is better agreement as to what constitutes adequate assessment of the construct. Suggestions for how a consensus might be attained are discussed.

PubMed Disclaimer