ArticleNursing open2023
Quality of life and associated factors among community-dwelling adults with multimorbidity in Shanghai, China: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Nursing open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Generic Frameworks and Scales for Measuring Quality of Life and Well-Being: Toward Finding the Right Ruler.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The association between disease status and health-related quality of life: evidence from a cross-sectional survey across mainland China.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Self-management and related factors in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Multimorbidity patterns and health-related quality of life among community-dwelling older adults: evidence from a rural town in Suzhou, China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Quality of life and associated factors among community-dwelling adults with multimorbidity in Shanghai, China: A cross-sectional study.Nursing open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the quality of life of patients with and without multimorbidity and investigate potential factors related to the quality of life in patients with multimorbidity.
designA descriptive cross-sectional study.
methodsThis study included 1778 residents with chronic diseases, including single disease (1255 people, average age: 60.78 ± 9.42) and multimorbidity (523 people, average age: 64.03 ± 8.91) groups, who were recruited from urban residents of Shanghai through a multistage, stratified, probability proportional to size sampling method. The quality of life was measured using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire. The socio-demographic data and psychological states were measured using a self-made structured questionnaire, Self-rating Anxiety Scale, and Self-rating Depression Scale. Differences in demographic characteristics were estimated using Pearson's chi-squared test, and independent t-test or one-way ANOVA followed by S-N-K test was used to compare the mean quality of life. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors for multimorbidity.
resultsThere were differences in age, education, income, and BMI between single-disease and multimorbidity groups, but no differences in gender, marriage, and occupation. Multimorbidity had lower quality of life, reflected in all four domains. Multiple linear regression analyses showed that low level of education, low income, number of diseases, depression, and anxiety were negatively related to quality of life in all domains.
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.