ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Measuring health-related quality of life among university students: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors impacting university students' quality of life.PloS one · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Quality of Life and Nurses' Turnover Intentions: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of nursing management · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding university students' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) can help propose strategies that support targeted care for this population and identify issues affecting these individuals. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the commonly used instruments and possible study designs for the university population, enabling the standardization of interventions and instruments to evaluate the HRQoL of university students. We aim to conduct a scoping review to identify the main measurement instruments and key characteristics in studies using HRQoL measures among university students. It is also aimed at identifying the foundations for guiding future research priorities.
methodsThis review will consider original peer-reviewed articles that used any generic HRQoL measurement instruments exclusively used with university students aged 18-59. Validation, qualitative, language translation, or adaptation studies will be excluded. This review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The research will be conducted in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus). Two reviewers will independently screen records using predefined eligibility criteria and extract data using tables. The extracted data will include specific details about the title, authors, year of publication, HRQoL instrument utilized, participants, intervention design, and critical findings. The results will be presented in a narrative summary with data displayed in tabular and diagrammatic formats. DISCUSSION: This proposed scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the existing methods for assessing health-related quality of life in university students. The results will help identify gaps in the literature and establish a foundation for guiding future research priorities. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: Registration with Open Science Framework can be found under registration number https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FY9GU .
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.