Cited by 57Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Quality of life among alcohol-dependent patients: How satisfactory are the available instruments? A systematic review

Luquiens, A., Reynaud, M., Falissard, B., Aubin, H.J.·2012·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Aim The purpose of this systematic review was to compare quality-of-life instruments used as outcome measures in randomized clinical trials for alcohol-dependence treatment.Methods Randomized controlled clinical trials, indexed in the EMBASE, PubMed and PsycINFO databases since 1981, which aimed at improving the quality of life in alcohol-dependent patients and used as instrument to measure the quality of life, as specifically designated by the authors, were included.Results Of the 331 articles screened, 18 studies were included in the review. Eight different quality-of-life instruments were used as outcome measures. Twenty-seven life domains were explored. Between-scale heterogeneity was high. The scale most frequently used was the medical outcomes study 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Only 1 clinical trial demonstrated a significant difference between intervention groups at all endpoints, using the quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire (Q-LES-Q).Conclusion Because many different instruments were used, it is difficult to compare quality-of-life improvement between trials. The most frequently used instrument was a generic health status measure that may not be well suited as a quality-of-life measure for subjects with alcohol dependence. The construction and validation of a specific patient-reported outcome based on alcohol-dependent patients' concerns would effectively contribute to the assessment of treatment efficacy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.08.012

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luquiens, A., Reynaud, M., Falissard, B., & Aubin, H. J.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Luquiens, A.
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-10
Volume
125
Issue
3
Pages
192-202
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2063397537
Cited by
57
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
quality of life, alcoholism, quality of life instruments, outcome measures, alcoholism treatment, SF-36, Q-LES-Q, patient-reported outcomes, instrument validation, treatment efficacy assessment
MeSH terms
Alcoholism, Clinical Trials as Topic, Health Status, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Personal Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review