Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34906156›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2021

Assessing the relative importance of key quality of life dimensions for people with and without a disability: an empirical ranking comparison study.

Matthew Crocker, Claire Hutchinson, Christine Mpundu-Kaambwa, Ruth Walker, Gang Chen, Julie Ratcliffe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2021. 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. Psychometric evaluation of the Disability Wellbeing Index (DWI) against the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) among people with disability.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  3. The relative importance of key life domains for people with disability: findings from a cross-sectional survey of NDIS participants in Australia.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  4. Use of the adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT) in research studies: an international scoping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. An investigation of the longitudinal trajectory patterns of health-related quality of life among Australians with disabilities: explaining disability types and properties.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Matthew CrockerHealth and Social Care Economics Group, Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. matthew.crocker@flinders.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6207-7850
Claire HutchinsonHealth and Social Care Economics Group, Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4289-8886
Christine Mpundu-KaambwaHealth and Social Care Economics Group, Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8152-6068
Ruth WalkerDisability and Community Inclusion, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5936-1068
Gang ChenCentre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, Melbourne, Caulfield East, VIC, 3145, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8385-5965
Julie RatcliffeHealth and Social Care Economics Group, Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7365-1988

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn economic evaluation, the quality of life of people with a disability has traditionally been assessed using preference-based instruments designed to measure and value quality of life. To provide robust measurement of the effectiveness of programs designed to improve the quality of life of people living with a disability, preference-based measures need to be sufficiently sensitive to detect incremental changes in the quality of life dimensions that are most important to people who have a disability. This study sought to explore whether there was a difference in the ranked order of importance of quality of life dimensions between people with a disability and people without a disability.

methodsAn online survey was developed and administered Australia wide. The first sample (n = 410) comprised adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a disability (n = 208) and family carers of person/s with a disability who were asked to respond on behalf of the person with a disability (n = 202). The second sample included adults without disability (n = 443). Respondents were asked to rank the importance of 12 quality of life dimensions extracted from the content of established preference-based quality of life measures (EQ-5D, AQoL and ASCOT).

resultsPeople with a disability placed relatively higher importance on broader quality of life dimensions (e.g. Control, Independence, Self-care) relative to health status focused dimensions (e.g. Vision, Hearing, Physical mobility). This distinction was less differentiable for those 'without a disability'. The biggest differences in ranked importance of dimensions were in: Vision ('with disability' = 10th, 'without disability' = 4th), Self-care ('with disability' = 3rd, 'without disability' = 7th) and Mental well-being ('with disability' = 6th, 'without disability' = 2nd).

conclusionsThe relative importance of quality of life dimensions for people with a disability differs to people without a disability. Quality of life is a key outcome for economic evaluation and for assessing the impact of disability care policy and practice in Australia and internationally. It is important that the effectiveness of interventions is measured and valued in ways which are fully reflective of the quality of life preferences of people with a disability.

Indexed as

Health StatusQuality of LifeAdultCaregiversEmpirical ResearchHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesDisabilityEconomic evaluationHealth economicsPreferencesQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID34906156
PMCPMC8670215

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.