Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-56f9d74cfd-hg4f7 Total loading time: 0.234 Render date: 2022-06-27T07:00:24.928Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Assessing the quality of life of the individual: the SEIQoL with a healthy and a gastroenterology unit population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

Hannah M. McGee*
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland and the University Psychiatric Policlinic, University of Bern, Switzerland
Ciaran A. O'Boyle
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland and the University Psychiatric Policlinic, University of Bern, Switzerland
Anne Hickey
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland and the University Psychiatric Policlinic, University of Bern, Switzerland
Kevin O'Malley
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland and the University Psychiatric Policlinic, University of Bern, Switzerland
C. R. B. Joyce
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland and the University Psychiatric Policlinic, University of Bern, Switzerland
*
1 Address for correspondence: Dr H. M. McGee, Department of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.

Synopsis

Current methods of measuring quality of life (QoL) impose an external value system on individuals, rather than allowing them to describe their lives in terms of those factors which they consider important. The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL) was developed to overcome such limitations. The QoL of 42 healthy attenders at an international immunization clinic was assessed using SEIQoL. Judgement reliability was high (r = 0·74) and individuals' judgement policies accounted for a large percentage of the variance in overall QoL (R2 = 0·75) demonstrating the construct validity of judgement analysis in this context.

In a second study of QoL of out-patients suffering from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (N = 20) or peptic ulcer disease (PUD) (N = 20) was assessed using SEIQoL. Judgement reliability was lower (r = 0·54) although statistically highly significant (P < 0·01), and the variance in overall QoL judgements explained was high (R2 = 0·74).

SEIQoL is an acceptable, reliable and valid technique for measuring individual QoL that takes greater account of individual perspectives than traditional measurement approaches.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bech, P., Haaber, A., Joyce, C. R. B. & the Danish University Antidepressant Group. (1986). Experiments on clinical observation and judgement in the assessment of depression: profiled videotapes and judgement analysis. Psychological Medicine 16, 873883.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergner, M., Bobbit, R. A., Carter, W. & Gilson, B. (1981). The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care 19, 787805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brickman, P. & Coates, D. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: is happiness relative? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 36, 917927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caiman, K. C. (1984). Quality of life in cancer patients – an hypothesis. Journal of Medical Ethics 10, 124127.Google Scholar
Carey, R. G. (1974). Emotional adjustment in terminal patients: a quantitative approach. Journal of Counselling Psychology 21, 443–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, L. W., McDonald, L. A., Tugwell, P., Buchanan, W. W. & Kraag, G. (1982). The McMaster Health Index Questionnaire as a measure of quality of life for patients with rheumatoid disease. Journal of Rheumatology 9, 780784.Google ScholarPubMed
Cohen, C. (1982). On the quality of life: some philosophical reflections. Circulation 66 (Suppl 3), 2933.Google ScholarPubMed
Fisch, H. U., Hammond, K. R., Joyce, C. R. B. & O'Reilly, M. (1981). An experimental study of the clinical judgement of general physicians in evaluating and prescribing for depression. British Journal of Psychiatry 138, 100109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, E., Creed, F. H. & Whorwell, P. J. (1987). Severe sexual dysfunction in women with the irritable bowel syndrome: comparison with inflammatory bowel disease and duodenal ulceration. British Medical Journal 295, 557558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamera, E. K. & Shontz, F. C. (1978). Perceived positive and negative effects of life-threatening illness. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 22, 419424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammond, K. R., Stewart, T. R., Brehmer, B. & Steinman, D. (1975). Social Judgement Theory. In Human Judgement and Decision Making (ed. Kaplan, M. & Schwartz, S.), pp. 271312. Academic Press: New York.Google Scholar
Hollandsworth, J. G. (1988). Evaluating the impact of medical treatment on the quality of life: a five year update. Social Science & Medicine 26, 425434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, K. M. & Salter, R. H. (1982). Irritable bowel syndrome – a safe diagnosis? British Medical Journal 285, 15331534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunt, S. M., McEwen, J. & McKenna, S. P. (1985). Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists. Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 35, 185188.Google ScholarPubMed
Jenkins, C. D., Stanton, B. A., Savageau, J. A., Denlinger, P. & Klein, M. D. (1983). Coronary artery bypass surgery: physical, psychological, social and economic outcomes six months later. Journal of the American Medical Association 250, 782788.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joyce, C. R. B. (1987). Psychosocial benefits. In Medicine and Risk-Benefit Decisions (ed. Walker, S. W. and Asscher, W.), pp. 99109. MTP Press: Lancaster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, C. R. B. (1988). Quality of life: the state of the art in clinical assessment. In Quality of Life Assessment and Application (ed. Walker, S. W. and Rosser, R. M.), pp. 169179. MTP Press: Lancaster.Google Scholar
Kirwan, J. R., Chaput de Saintonge, D. M., Joyce, C. R. B. & Currey, H. F. L. (1983). Clinical judgement in rheumatoid arthritis H. Judging ‘current disease activity’ in clinical practice. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 42, 645651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laborde, J. M. & Powers, M. J. (1980). Satisfaction with life for patients undergoing hemodialysis and patients suffering from osteoarthritis. Nursing Health 3, 1924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latimer, P., Sarna, S., Campbell, D., Latimer, M., Waterfall, W. & Daniel, E. E. (1981). Colonic motor and myoelectrical activity: a comparative study of normal subjects, psychoneurotic patients and patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Gastroenterology 80, 893901.Google Scholar
Liu, B. (1973). The Quality of Life in the United States, 1970. Midwest Research Institute: Kansas.Google Scholar
Nakagawa, T., Sugita, M. & Ikemi, Y. (1979). Alexithymic features in digestive diseases. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 32, 191203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Boyle, C. A., McGee, H. M., Hickey, A., O'Malley, K. & Joyce, C. R. B. (1991). But what does the patient think? Individualizing quality of life measurement in hip-replacement surgery. (Submitted for publication).Google Scholar
Pearlman, R. A. & Uhlmann, R. F. (1988). Quality of life in chronic diseases: perceptions of elderly patients. Journal of Gerontology 43, M2530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Policy PC (1986). Software for Judgement Analysis, Version 2.0. Reference Manual (1st edn.). Albany: Executive Division Services.Google Scholar
Sjodin, I. & Svedlund, J. (1985). Psychological aspects of non-ulcer dyspepsia: a psychosomatic view focusing on a comparison between the irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer disease. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 109 (Suppl), 5158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slevin, M. L., Plant, H., Lunch, D., Drinkwater, J. & Gregory, W. M. (1988). Who should measure quality of life, the doctor or the patient? British Journal of Cancer 57, 109122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitzer, W. O., Dobson, A. J., Hall, J., Chesterman, E., Levi, J., Sheperd, R., Battista, R. N. & Catchlove, B. R. (1981). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients. A concise QL-index for use by physicians. Journal of Chronic Diseases 34, 585597CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, T. R. (1988). Judgement analysis: procedures. In Human Judgment. The Social Judgment Theory View (ed. Brehmer, B. and Joyce, C. R. B.), pp. 4174. North-Holland: Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennant, C. (1988). Psychosocial causes of deuodenal ulcer. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 22, 195200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dam, F. S. A. M., Somers, R., van Beek-Couzijn, A. L. (1981). Quality of life: some theoretical issues. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 21, 166S168S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waller, S. L. & Miscewicz, J. J. (1969). Prognosis with the irritable bowel syndrome. Lancet i, 753756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, G. W., Hillman, L. C. & Pomare, E. W. (1985). Psychoneurotic symptomatology in the irritable bowel syndrome: a study of reporters and non-reporters. British Medical Journal 291, 13821384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitehead, W. E., Winget, C., Fedoravicius, A. S., Wolley, S. & Blackwell, B. (1982). Learned illness behaviour in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer. Digestive Diseases & Sciences 27, 202208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, A. (1985). Economics of coronary artery bypass grafting. British Medical Journal 291, 326329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
209
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Assessing the quality of life of the individual: the SEIQoL with a healthy and a gastroenterology unit population
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Assessing the quality of life of the individual: the SEIQoL with a healthy and a gastroenterology unit population
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Assessing the quality of life of the individual: the SEIQoL with a healthy and a gastroenterology unit population
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *