uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Oncology and Radiation Science, Oncology.
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, ISSN 1471-2288, E-ISSN 1471-2288, Vol. 14, 115- p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: The study aimed to investigate the meaning patients assign to two measures of quality of life: the Schedule for Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) and the SEIQoL-DW Disease Related (DR) version, in a clinical oncology setting. Even though the use of quality of life assessments has increased during the past decades, uncertainty regarding how to choose the most suitable measure remains. SEIQoL-DW versions assesses the individual's perception of his or her present quality of life by allowing the individual to nominate the domains to be evaluated followed by a weighting procedure resulting in qualitative (domains) as well as quantitative outcomes (index score). Methods: The study applied a cross-sectional design with a qualitative approach and collected data from a purposeful sample of 40 patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Patients were asked to complete two measures, SEIQoL-DW and the SEIQoL-DR, to assess quality of life. This included nomination of the areas in life considered most important and rating of these areas; after completion patients participated in cognitive interviews around their selections of areas. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim which was followed by analysis using a phenomenographic approach. Results: The analyses of nominated areas of the two measures resulted in 11 domains reflecting what patients perceived had greatest impact on their quality of life. Analysis of the cognitive interviews resulted in 16 thematic categories explaining the nominated domains. How patients reflected around their quality of life appeared to differ by version (DW vs. DR). The DW version more often related to positive aspects in life while the DR version more often related to negative changes in life due to having cancer. Conclusions: The two SEIQoL versions tap into different concepts; health-related quality of life, addressing losses and problems related to having cancer and, quality of life, more associated with aspects perceived as positive in life. The SEIQoL-DR and the SEIQoL-DW are recommended in clinical practice to take both negative and positive aspects into account and acting on the problems of greatest importance to the patient.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 14, 115- p.
Keyword [en]
Cognitive interviews, Gastrointestinal cancer, Health related quality of life, Measures, SEIQoL, Quality of life
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-242028DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-115ISI: 000346437700001PubMedID: 25300493OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-242028DiVA: diva2:782177
Available from: 2015-01-20 Created: 2015-01-20 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(428 kB)82 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 428 kBChecksum SHA-512
9119afc898515e3ee5088a232b29266f7d3219fea7c30d74206780b7753d0f221d207dd9980887344680ed87db74313d45ca4a7be2e1e61361f21a4a75cea812
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Kettis, ÅsaGlimelius, BengtRing, Lena

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kettis, ÅsaGlimelius, BengtRing, Lena
By organisation
Centre for Research Ethics and BioethicsOncology
In the same journal
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 82 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 459 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf