ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2015
How to interpret multidimensional quality of life questionnaires for patients with schizophrenia?
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality of life assessment in individuals with schizophrenia: a COSMIN-based systematic review of S-QoL41 and S-QoL18 incorporating neurobiological support.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Moroccan Arabic adaptation and cross cultural validation of the Schizophrenia Quality of Life short version questionnaire SQoL 18 in individuals with schizophrenia.Discover mental health · 2026Article
- Subjectively different but objectively the same? Three profiles of QoL in people with severe mental health problems.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe classification of patients into distinct categories of quality of life (QoL) levels may be useful for clinicians to interpret QoL scores from multidimensional questionnaires. The aim of this study had been to define clusters of QoL levels from a specific multidimensional questionnaire (SQoL18) for patients with schizophrenia by using a new method of interpretable clustering and to test its validity regarding socio-demographic, clinical, and QoL information.
methodsIn this multicentre cross-sectional study, patients with schizophrenia have been classified using a hierarchical top-down method called clustering using unsupervised binary trees (CUBT). A three-group structure has been employed to define QoL levels as "high", "moderate", or "low". Socio-demographic, clinical, and QoL data have been compared between the three clusters to ensure their clinical relevance.
resultsA total of 514 patients have been analysed: 78 are classified as "low", 265 as "moderate", and 171 as "high". The clustering shows satisfactory statistical properties, including reproducibility (using bootstrap analysis) and discriminancy (using factor analysis). The three clusters consistently differentiate patients. As expected, individuals in the "high" QoL level cluster report the lowest scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (p = 0.01) and the Calgary Depression Scale (p < 0.01), and the highest scores on the Global Assessment of Functioning (p < 0.03), the SF36 (p < 0.01), the EuroQol (p < 0.01), and the Quality of Life Inventory (p < 0.01).
conclusionGiven the ease with which this method can be applied, classification using CUBT may be useful for facilitating the interpretation of QoL scores in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25854680What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.