IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v336y2023ics0277953623006287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing indigenous quality of life: A review of preference-based quality of life instruments and elicitation techniques with global older indigenous populations

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor, Kevin
  • Ratcliffe, Julie
  • Bessarab, Dawn
  • Smith, Kate

Abstract

Indigenous perspectives of quality of life (QoL) are different to that of non-Indigenous populations. Determining how to identify and value what is important to QoL for people from diverse cultural backgrounds is crucial for assessing effective outcomes for quality assessment and health economic evaluation to guide evidence-based decision making. This is particularly important for older Indigenous people who have complex care and support needs within health and aged-care systems. This scoping review aims to assess the existing literature in this field by firstly identifying preference based instruments that have been applied with older Indigenous peoples and secondly, exploring the extent to which existing preference based instruments applied with older Indigenous peoples encompass older Indigenous peoples QoL perspectives in their design and application. The inclusion criteria for the review were studies using preference based QoL instruments with an Indigenous population where the cohort was aged 50 years or over. This resulted in the critical analysis of 12 studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor, Kevin & Ratcliffe, Julie & Bessarab, Dawn & Smith, Kate, 2023. "Valuing indigenous quality of life: A review of preference-based quality of life instruments and elicitation techniques with global older indigenous populations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:336:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623006287
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623006287
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116271?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:336:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623006287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.