Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Measuring Quality of Life: Incorporating Objectively Measurable Parameters within the Cross-Sectional Bern Cohort Study 2014 (BeCS-14).
Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monitoring and evaluation instruments of individual health in community settings: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of job satisfaction on quality of life in women at the workplace within the cross-sectional Bern Cohort Study 2014 (BeCS-14).Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Up until now, the measurement of Quality of Life (QoL) was based on validated subjective rating tools rather than objective measurement. To become more independent of the self-assessment of probands, a way to objectively measure QoL should be found. A monocenter, cross-sectional, observational, non-interventional trial was performed from 2012 to 2014 at Inselspital Bern to evaluate the bio-functional status (BFS), a complex, generic, non-invasive, sex- and age-validated assessment tool, in a wide range of areas. A standardized battery of assessments was performed on 464 females and 166 males, ages 18 to 65 (n = 630). In addition to the survey of the BFS, participants replied-among others-to the validated questionnaire SF-36 for health-related QoL (n = 447, subgroup 1). Since the accepted cut-off value for BFA calculation is age ≥ 35 years, subgroup 2 included 227 subjects (all participants aged ≥ 35 years out of subgroup 1). In order to be able to compare the eight SF-36 subscales to BFS parameters, a comparable score set of single BFS items had to be constructed. Subsequently, we aimed to statistically identify BFS item combinations that best represented each SF-36 subscale. All eight SF-36 subscales were significantly represented by various different combinations of BFS items. A total of 24 single BFS items significantly correlated with SF-36 subscales, of which 15 were objective and nine were subjective. All eight SF-36 subscales were significantly represented by various different combinations of BFS items leading to stronger correlations (range five to nine BFS items), and overall, sex and age did not affect these associations, but in the SF-36 subscales 'bodily pain' (sex) and 'role limitations due to physical health problems' (age in men). To our knowledge, we are the first to correlate a validated set of 34 objective and 9 subjective parameters with subjectively evaluated SF-36 subscales. This first study on the objectifiability of the SF-36 questionnaire demonstrated that questions on quality of life can be answered independently of a subjective assessment by subjects in future scientific studies.
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.