ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Review of Generic Frameworks and Scales for Measuring Quality of Life and Well-Being: Toward Finding the Right Ruler.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparing Quality of Life and Well-Being Among Patients with Chronic Diseases.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Assessing quality of life (QOL) and well-being ideally requires considering a broad range of measurable factors. This article reviews the various frameworks of QOL and well-being published in the literature, with the aim of comparing their domains. Moving forward, this study elaborates on the justifications and applications of the recent scale. The previously established QOL and well-being scales identified include the Quality of Life Scale (QOLS), WHOQOL-BREF, and the Significant Quality of Life Measure (SigQOLM). A total of 41 domains were compared and discussed. The WHOQOL-BREF (13/26 = 50.0%) and SigQOLM (33/69 = 47.8%) incorporate a balanced item set that measures both health and non-health elements. In SigQOLM, the majority of indicators for QOL and well-being (39/41) are represented with more than one item. Thus, SigQOLM provides a more comprehensive framework for assessing QOL and well-being compared to earlier scales. Therefore, researchers, policymakers, and healthcare providers can utilize SigQOLM to gain a deeper understanding of the broader implications of healthcare and policy interventions on people's lives.
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.