Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29497339›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2018

Quality of life and burden of morbidity in primary care users with multimorbidity.

Michele Peters, Laura Kelly, Caroline M Potter, Crispin Jenkinson, Elizabeth Gibbons, Julien Forder, Ray Fitzpatrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Analysing the impact of complex multimorbidity on health-related quality of life.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Relationships between Demographic Factors and Chronic Conditions with Disease Severities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Michele PetersHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Laura KellyHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Caroline M PotterHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Crispin JenkinsonHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Elizabeth GibbonsHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Julien ForderPersonal Social Services Research Unit, School of Social Policy Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Ray FitzpatrickHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to assess the quality of life, number of diseases and burden of morbidity of multimorbid primary care users and whether a simple disease count or a multimorbidity burden score is more predictive of quality of life. PATIENTS AND

methodsPrimary care patients with at least 1 of 11 specified chronic conditions were invited to participate in a postal survey. Participants completed the Disease Burden Impact Scale (DBIS) questionnaire, the five dimension-five level Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5L) and standard demographics questions. The DBIS asks participants to self-report chronic conditions and to rate the impact of each condition. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance were used to determine quality of life, count of diseases and burden of morbidity. Multiple linear regression analyses determined whether disease count or the DBIS, adjusted for demographics, was more predictive of the EQ-5D-5L scores.

resultsThirty-one percent (n=917) responded, from which 69 were excluded as they reported no or only one condition, leaving 848 (92%) in the analysis. Slightly more women (50.9%) participated; the mean age was 67.0 (SD 13.9) and the mean number of conditions was 6.5 (SD 3.49). The mean scores were: DBIS 15.5 (SD 12.00; score range 0-140, with higher scores indicating higher multimorbidity burden), EQ-5D-5L score 0.69 (SD 0.28; score range -0.28 [a state worse than death] to 1 [best possible health state]) and EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS) 65.44 (SD 23.66; score range 0-100 with higher scores meaning better health). The model using the DBIS score was more predictive of the EQ-5D-5L score and EQ-VAS than the model using the disease count (

conclusionThe DBIS is a useful measure for assessing multimorbidity from the perspective of primary care users in particular, as it is more predictive of health outcomes than a simple count of conditions.

Indexed as

chronic diseasedisease burdenmultimorbiditypatient-reported outcomesquality of life

Identifiers

PMID29497339
PMCPMC5818872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.