IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

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

  • Hollandsworth, James G.
Registered author(s):

    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 (e) 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.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 26 (1988)
    Issue (Month): 4 (January)
    Pages: 425-434

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:26:y:1988:i:4:p:425-434
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:26:y:1988:i:4:p:425-434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.