The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting
Open accessAbstract
This is the second in a series of five articles In modern medicine the traditional way of assessing change in patients has been to focus on laboratory or clinical tests. At its most simple this involves measuring pulse, blood pressure, and temperature, and carrying out physical examinations. At more complex levels it may include haematological analysis, computed tomography, radiography, organ function tests, genetic analysis, and other investigations. While these give important information about the disease, especially about chronic and progressive diseases, it is impossible to separate disease from an individual's personal and social context. No illness exists in a vacuum. One way of capturing the personal and social context of patients is to use quality of life measures.1 These are accepted as outcome measures in clinical research but are rarely used in routine clinical practice, despite the fact that Florence Nightingale was one of the first clinicians to insist on measuring the outcome of routine care to evaluate treatment.2 This article reviews the challenges of using quality of life measures in clinical practice including selecting appropriate measures, analysing data, providing feedback, interpreting results, and incorporating these measures into clinical decision making. Practical ways of resolving the tension between the need for approaches suitable in the clinical encounter and the highly individualised nature of quality of life are also examined. #### Summary points Using quality of life measures in clinical practice ensures that treatment and evaluations focus on the patient rather than the disease The measures are potentially useful in both the clinical encounter and in quality improvement They are not a substitute for measures of disease outcomes and may not always be the most appropriate patient centred outcome to assess Measures developed for research often cannot easily be used in clinical practice Measures that form an integral part of treatment planning …
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., Filiberti, A., Flechtner, H., Fleishman, S. B., Haes, J. C. J. M. D., et al. (1993) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/85.5.365 · Cited by 16,005
Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials.
Fitzpatrick, Davey, Buxton, & Jones (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2140 · Cited by 1,715
Are quality of life measures patient centred?
Carr, A. J., & Higginson, I. J. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7298.1357 · Cited by 571
Self-citationA New Approach to the Measurement of Quality of Life: The Patient-Generated Index
Ruta, D. A., Garratt, A. M., Leng, M., Russell, I. T., & MacDonald, L. M. (1994) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199411000-00004 · Cited by 527
Cited by
Cella, D., Gershon, R., Lai, J.-S., & Choi, S. (2007) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9204-6 · Cited by 623
Impact of patient‐reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review
Marshall, S., Haywood, K., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00650.x · Cited by 602
Boyes, A., Girgis, A., & Lecathelinais, C. (2009) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01057.x · Cited by 530
Training carers of stroke patients: randomised controlled trial
Kalra, L., Evans, A., Perez, I., Melbourn, A., Patel, A., Knapp, M., & Donaldson, N. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7448.1099 · Cited by 445
Grewal, I., Lewis, J., Flynn, T., Brown, J., Bond, J., & Coast, J. (2006) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.023 · Cited by 402
Metadata
- Authors
- Higginson, I. J., & Carr, A. J.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2001-05-26
- Volume
- 322
- Issue
- 7297
- Pages
- 1297-1300
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2254959387
- Cited by
- 981
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 68.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.322.7297.1297
- The paper
- Higginson, I. J., & Carr, A. J. (2001). Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7297.1297
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.