Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Quality of life: Review of its conceptual aspects

Calidad de vida: revisión de sus aspectos conceptuales




Section
Others

How to Cite
Quality of life: Review of its conceptual aspects.
rev. colomb. neumol. [Internet]. 2008 Dec. 1 [cited 2024 Nov. 24];20(4):199-202.

DOI
license
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Ninguna publicación, nacional o extranjera, podrá reproducir ni traducir sus artículos ni sus resúmenes sin previa autorización escrita del editor; sin embargo  los usuarios pueden descargar la información contenida en ella, pero deben darle atribución o reconocimiento de propiedad intelectual, deben usarlo tal como está, sin derivación alguna.

María Beatriz Ospina García

    María Beatriz Ospina García,

    Egresada Epidemiología, Escola Paulista de Medicina. Centro de Evaluación Económica de Canadá


    There are a broad confusion around the term «Quality of life» and authors use different approaches to the concept from very different perspectives. The objective of this review is present to the clinician the background in understanding the concept of Quality of life and present an updated model of the concept of quality of life. Although conceptual differences in the use of the term are far to be resolved, the multidimensional nature of the construct generated by the quality of life model give patients and clinicians a new field of research and a common pathway to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions.
    Five different perspectives underlie the evolutions of the term «Quality of life»: a.) a psychological approach, b.) the utility concept, c.) community – centered concept, d.) the return to the normal life concept, and e.) the principle of distance.


    Article visits 20 | PDF visits 16


    Downloads

    Download data is not yet available.
    1. Bowling A. Measuring disease. Open University press. Buckingham, 1997.
    2. Calman KC. Quality of life in cancer patients –an hypothesis. J Med Ethics 1984; 53: 2316-23.
    3. Ware JE. Conceptualizing disease impact and treatment outcomes. Cancer 1984; 53: 2316-23.
    4. Levy SM. Herberman RB, Maluish AM, Schlien B, Lippman M. Prognostic risk assessment in primary breast cancer by behavioral and immunological parameters. Health Psychol 1985; 4: 99-113.
    5. Mcneil BJ, Weichselbaum R, Pauker SG. Speech and survival: Tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 1981; 305: 982-7.
    6. Singer PA, Tasch ES, Stocking C, Rubin S, Sieger M, Weichselbaum R. Sex or survival: Trade-offs between quality and quantity of live. J Clin Oncol. 1991; 9:328-34.
    7. Mchorney CA, Ware JE, Rackzek AE. The MOS 36-item short form health survey (S-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247-63.
    8. Wood Dauphinee S, Williams JI. Reintegration to normal living as a proxy of quality of life. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 491-9.
    9. Spitzer WO, Dobson AJ, Hall J, et al. Measuring quality of life of cancer patients: A concise Q/L index for use by physicians. J Chronic Dis 1981; 34: 585-97.
    10. Jenkins CD, Jono RT, Stanton BA, Stroup CA. The measurement of health-related quality of life: Major dimensions identified by factor analysis. Soc Sci Med 1990; 31: 925-31.
    11. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP, Wu AW, Mathews WC, Kozin F, Orenstein D. The quality of well-being scale. Applications in AIDS, cystic fibrosis and arthritis. Med Care 1989; 27: S27-S43.
    12. Slevin MR, Plant H, Lynch D, Drinkwater J, Gregory WM. Who should measure quality of life, the doctor of the patient? Br J Cancer 1988; 57: 109-12
    Sistema OJS 3.4.0.7 - Metabiblioteca |