We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Measuring quality of life in stroke.
Stroke; a Journal of Cerebral Circulation 1993 Februrary
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Little attention has been focused on quality of life in stroke outcome research. The purpose of this review is to outline the meaning of the concept, describe important methodological issues and methods of assessment, review existing quality of life measures, and discuss criteria for selecting an appropriate instrument.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW: The following 10 quality of life instruments were reviewed: COOP Charts; Euroqol; Frenchay Activities Index; Karnofsky Performance Status Scale; McMaster Health Index Questionnaire; Medical Outcomes Study 20-Item Short-Form Health Survey; Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Index; Quality of Well-being Scale; and the Sickness Impact Profile. They were evaluated in terms of length, time needed to complete, content, scoring, and psychometric characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis should be placed on further psychometric evaluation of existing quality of life measures rather than on generating new instruments. There is particular need for supplementary data on the responsiveness of the instruments to changes in patients' clinical status over time. The choice of a suitable quality of life instrument should be based not only on psychometric properties but also on careful consideration of the research question, the relevance to the objectives of the study, the feasibility of the instrument, and the specific characteristics of the stroke patients under investigation.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW: The following 10 quality of life instruments were reviewed: COOP Charts; Euroqol; Frenchay Activities Index; Karnofsky Performance Status Scale; McMaster Health Index Questionnaire; Medical Outcomes Study 20-Item Short-Form Health Survey; Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Index; Quality of Well-being Scale; and the Sickness Impact Profile. They were evaluated in terms of length, time needed to complete, content, scoring, and psychometric characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis should be placed on further psychometric evaluation of existing quality of life measures rather than on generating new instruments. There is particular need for supplementary data on the responsiveness of the instruments to changes in patients' clinical status over time. The choice of a suitable quality of life instrument should be based not only on psychometric properties but also on careful consideration of the research question, the relevance to the objectives of the study, the feasibility of the instrument, and the specific characteristics of the stroke patients under investigation.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Anti-Arrhythmic Effects of Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and Their Role in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: From Beta-Blockers to Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and Beyond.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app