Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28762100›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2017

Measuring quality of life in opioid-dependent people: a systematic review of assessment instruments.

Lisa Strada, Wouter Vanderplasschen, Angela Buchholz, Bernd Schulte, Ashley E Muller, Uwe Verthein, Jens Reimer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Game of Mirrors: Health Profiles in Patient and Physician Perceptions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lisa StradaCentre for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. L.strada@uke.de.ORCID 0000-0002-3093-4002
Wouter VanderplasschenDepartment of Special Needs Education, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Angela BuchholzDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Bernd SchulteCentre for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Ashley E MullerNorwegian Centre for Addiction Research, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Pb 1039 Blindern, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Uwe VertheinCentre for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Jens ReimerCentre for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOpioid dependence is a chronic relapsing disorder. Despite increasing research on quality of life (QOL) in people with opioid dependence, little attention has been paid to the instruments used. This systematic review examines the suitability of QOL instruments for use in opioid-dependent populations and the instruments' quality.

methodsA systematic search was performed in the databases Medline, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Articles were eligible if they assessed QOL of opioid-dependent populations using a validated QOL instrument. Item content relevance to opioid-dependent people was evaluated by means of content analysis, and instrument properties were assessed using minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures.

resultsEighty-nine articles were retrieved, yielding sixteen QOL instruments, of which ten were assessed in this review. Of the ten instruments, six were disease specific, but none for opioid dependence. Two instruments had good item content relevance. The conceptual and measurement model were described in seven instruments. Four instruments were developed with input from the respective target population. Eight instruments had low respondent and administrator burden. Psychometric properties were either not assessed in opioid-dependent populations or were inconclusive or moderate.

conclusionsNo instrument scored perfectly on both the content and properties. The limited suitability of instruments for opioid-dependent people hinders accurate and sensitive measurement of QOL in this population. Future research is in need of an opioid dependence-specific QOL instrument to measure the true impact of the disease on people's lives and to evaluate treatment-related services.

Indexed as

HumansOpioid-Related DisordersPsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsContent analysisInstrumentOpioidQuality of lifeReviewSubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID28762100
PMCPMC5681984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.