ArticleNursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals2022
Relating person-centredness to quality-of-life assessments and patient-reported outcomes in healthcare: A critical theoretical discussion.
Article in Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using intersectionality to inform fit-for-purpose patient-reported outcome measure development: a qualitative interview study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- It's you it's about! Exploring existential aspects on quality of life with myasthenia gravis.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Time is now to consider how we evaluate person-centred care-the role of patient-reported outcomes.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Relating person-centredness to quality-of-life assessments and patient-reported outcomes in healthcare: A critical theoretical discussion.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Engagement with the historical and theoretical underpinnings of measuring quality of life (QoL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in healthcare is important. Ideas and values that shape such practices-and in the endgame, people's lives-might otherwise remain unexamined, be taken for granted or even essentialized. Our aim is to explicate and theoretically discuss the philosophical tenets underlying the practices of QoL assessment and PRO measurement in relation to the notion of person-centredness. First, we engage with the late-modern history of the concept of QoL and the act of assessing and measuring it. Working with the historical method of genealogy, we describe the development of both QoL assessments and PRO measures (PROMs) within healthcare by accounting for the contextual conditions for their possibility. In this way, the historical and philosophical underpinnings of these measurement practices are highlighted. We move on to analyse theoretical and philosophical underpinnings regarding the use of PROMs and QoL assessments in clinical practice, as demonstrated in review studies thereof. Finally, we offer a critical analysis regarding the state of theory in the literature and conclude that, although improved person-centredness is an implied driver of QoL assessments and PROMs in clinical practice, enhanced theoretical underpinning of the development of QoL assessments is called for.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.