Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28944529›Full record

ArticleHealth economics2018

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses.

Hareth Al-Janabi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Developing dimensions for a new preference-based quality of life instrument for older people receiving aged care services in the community.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Hareth Al-JanabiHealth Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3691-8310

Funding

Medical Research Council G1002334
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A core feature of the capability approach is that a person's capabilities (what they are able to do and be in their life) can differ from their functionings (what they actually do and are in their life). However, the degree to which capability and functioning differ in practice is unclear. This paper investigates this issue, focusing on capability and functioning differences (CFD) across different aspects of life and different individuals. In the study, the ICECAP-A capability questionnaire was modified to measure both functionings and capabilities and was completed by U.K.-based convenience sample of 943 people. Around one third of people reported CFD in at least one area of their life, most commonly in terms of their "achievement." People were more likely to report CFD when they had a degree-level education and when they had impaired health. An additional finding was that capability varied more with education whereas functioning varied more with health status. This finding needs further examination, but it suggests that the choice of evaluative space may influence how priorities are set for public spending.

Indexed as

AchievementHealth StatusAdultAgedEducational StatusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPleasureReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportSocial SupportSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomcapability approachICECAPoutcome valuationwell-being

Identifiers

PMID28944529
PMCPMC5900903

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.