Quality of life is increasingly being recognized as an important outcome in patient care. In spite of the popularity of the concept, its use is not without difficulties.
Because quality of life is a subjective phenomenon it is not easy to define, as no gold standard exists as to what is a good life. This has resulted in different definitions of quality of life as well as discrepancies of design and development of instruments to measure the construct within different sciences. The usefulness of quality of life within nursing research and practice is dependent on: 1) the way the concept is defined and operationalized, 2) the clinical relevance of the questions raised in the study, 3) study design and 4) further methodological development.
RustøenT.Livskvalitet en sykepleieutfordring. Oslo: Gyldendal, 1991.
7.
FowlieMBerkelyJ.Quality of life - a review of the literature. Family Practice1987; vol.4, no.3, p. 226–34.
8.
TatarkiewiczW.Analysis of happiness. Warszawa: Polish Scientific Publishers, 1976.
9.
NæssS.Yrkeskvinne-husmor gifte kvinners livskvalitet. Oslo: Institutt for anvendt samfunnsforskning, Rapport 1986: 3.
10.
AggemæsA.Livskvalitet. København: Foreningen af danske lægestuderendes forlag, 1988.
11.
NordenfeltL.Livskvalitet och hälsa. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1991.
12.
JohansenVA. Helse og livskvalitet. Sykepleien1991; vol. 79, no. 9, p. 16–8,34.
13.
de HaesJCJMvan KnippenbergFCE. The quality of life of cancer patients: A review of the literature. Social Science and Medicine1985; vol. 20, p. 809–17.
14.
SullivanM.Livskvalitetsmätning i kliniska utvärderingsförsök. Scandinavian Jornal of Behaviour Therapy1988; vol. 17, suppl. 8, p. 29–47.
15.
PadillaGVGrantMMFerrellB.Nursing research into quality of life. Quality of Life Research1992; vol. 1, p. 341–48.
16.
CampellAConversePERogersWL. The quality of American life. New York: Russel Sage Foundations, 1976.
17.
AndrewsFMWitheySB. Social indicators of well-being. New York: Plenum, 1976.
18.
MælandK.Kartlegging av livskvaliteten i lokalsamfunnet - en mulig oppgave for kommunepsykologene. En metodeoversikt. Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening1988; vol. 21, p. 563–78.
19.
BowlingA.Measuring health. A review of quality of life measurement scales. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1991.
20.
LingjærdeOBechPMaltUDenckerSJElgenKAhlforsUG. Skalaer for diagnostikk og sykdomsgradering ved psykiatriske tilstander. Del I Metodologiske aspekter. Nordisk Psykiatrisk Tidsskrift1989; vol. 43, suppl.no. 19.
21.
LingjærdeOBechPMaltUDenckerSJElgenKAhlforsUG. Skalaer for diagnostikk og sykdomsgradering ved psykiatriske tilstander. Del II Utvalg av skalaer. Nordisk Psykiatrisk Tidsskrift1990; vol. 44, no. 2.
22.
HuntSMMcEwenJMcKenna. Measuring health status. London: Croom Helm, 1986.
23.
BergnerMBobbinRACarterWBGilsonBS: The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care1981; vol. 19, p. 787–805.
24.
BergnerM.Development, testing and use of the Sickness Impact Profile. I: WalkerSRRosserRM, eds. Quality of life: Assessment and application. Lancaster: MTP Press, 1988.
25.
MeadowsKA. Assessing quality of life. I: BradleyCHomePChristieM, eds. The technology of diabetes care. Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1991.
26.
MælandJG. Metoder for å måle helse og livskvalitet. Tidsskrift for Norsk Lægeforening1987; vol. 107, no. 12, p. 1053–7.
27.
William-OlssonL.Diabetikern och våra livsvillkor. Stockholm:Raben & Sjögren, 1989.
28.
NyhlinKT. A contribution of qualitative research to a better understanding of diabetic patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing1990; vol. 15, p. 796–803.
29.
NyhlinKTLithnerFNorbergA.Experience of being diabetic. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences1987; vol. 1, p. 59–67.
