Exploring the measurement of health related quality of life and broader instruments: A dimensionality analysis
Jan M Heijdra Suasnabar,Aureliano Paolo Finch,Brendan Mulhern,M Elske van den Akker-van Marle,Jan M. Heijdra Suasnabar,M. Elske van den Akker-van Marle
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116720
IF: 5.379
2024-02-01
Social Science & Medicine
Abstract:BACKGROUND: Comprehensively measuring the outcomes of interventions and policy programmes impacting both health and broader areas of quality of life (QoL) is important for decision-making within and across sectors. Increasingly, broad QoL measures are being developed to capture outcomes beyond health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Jointly exploring the dimensionality of diverse instruments can improve our understanding about their evaluative space and how they conceptually build on each other. This study explored the measurement relationship between five broader QoL measures and the most widely used HRQoL measure, the EQ-5D.METHODS: Participants from the Dutch general population (n = 1002) completed six instruments (n = 126 items) in December of 2020. The measurement relationship was explored using qualitative and quantitative dimensionality assessment methods. This included a content analysis and exploratory factor analyses which were used to develop a confirmatory factor model of the broader QoL dimensions. Correlations between the identified dimensions and self-reported overall health and wellbeing were also explored.RESULTS: The final CFA model exhibited acceptable/good fit and described 12 QoL dimensions: 'psychological symptoms', 'social relations', 'physical functioning', 'emotional resilience', 'pain', 'cognition', 'financial needs', 'discrimination', 'outlook on life/growth', 'access to public services', 'living environment', and 'control over life'. All dimensions were positively correlated to self-reported health and wellbeing, but the magnitudes in associations varied considerably (e.g., 'pain' had the strongest correlation with overall health but a weak correlation with wellbeing).CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to a broader understanding of QoL by exploring the dimensionality and relationships among various QoL measures. A number of the dimensions identified are HRQoL-focused, with others covering broader constructs. Our findings offer insights for the development of comprehensive instruments, or use of instrument suites that capture multidimensional aspects of QoL. Further research should explore the relevance and feasibility/appropriateness of measuring the identified dimensions in different settings and populations.
public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, biomedical