A systematic review of studies measuring health-related quality of life of general injury populations
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: It is important to obtain greater insight into health-related quality of life (HRQL) of injury patients in order to document people's pathways to recovery and to quantify the impact of injury on population health over time. We performed a systematic review of studies measuring HRQL in general injury populations with a generic health state measure to summarize existing knowledge. METHODS: Injury studies (1995-2009) were identified with main inclusion criteria being the use of a generic health status measure and not being restricted to one specific type of injury. Articles were collated by study design, HRQL instrument used, timing of assessment(s), predictive variables and ability to detect change over time. RESULTS: Forty one studies met inclusion criteria, using 24 different generic HRQL and functional status measures (most used were SF-36, FIM, GOS, EQ-5D). The majority of the studies used a longitudinal design, but with different lengths and timings of follow-up (mostly 6, 12, and 24 months). Different generic health measures were able to discriminate between the health status of subgroups and picked up changes in health status between discharge and 12 month follow-up. Most studies reported high prevalences of health problems within the first year after injury. The twelve studies that reported HRQL utility scores showed considerable but incomplete recovery in the first year after discharge. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates large variation in use of HRQL instruments, study populations, and assessment time points used in studies measuring HRQL of general injury populations. This variability impedes comparison of HRQL summary scores between studies and prevented formal meta-analyses aiming to quantify and improve precision of the impact of injury on population health over time.
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
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.
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?
The follow-up studies used different injury classifications that needed to be mapped into the GBD cause and nature-of-injury categories and the follow-up studies used different patient-reported outcome measures, introducing greater uncertainty and potential bias in our estimation of disability.
“Third, the follow-up studies used different injury classifications that needed to be mapped into the GBD cause and nature-of-injury categories and the follow-up studies used different patient-reported outcome measures, introducing greater uncertainty and potential bias in our estimation of disability.”
From The global burden of injury: incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years and time trends from the Global Burden of Disease study 2013 (2016) · cites this paper as [57]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 133
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Aitken ME Tilford JM Barrett KW Parker JG Simpson P Landgraf J Robbins JM Health status of children after admission for injury Pediatrics 2002 110 337 342 10.1542/peds.110.2.337 12165587 · DOI
- Polinder S van Beeck EF Essink-Bot ML Toet H Looman CW Mulder S Meerding WJ Functional outcome at 2.5, 5, 9, and 24 months after injury in the Netherlands J Trauma 2007 62 133 141 10.1097/TA.0b013e31802b71c9 17215744 · DOI
- Alves ALA Salim FM Martinez EZ Passos ADC de Carlo MMRP Scarpelini S Quality of life in trauma victims six months after hospital discharge Rev Saude Publica 2009 43 1 6 19169588
- Authors
- Polinder, S., Haagsma, J. A., Belt, E., Lyons, R. A., Erasmus, V., Lund, J., & van Beeck, E. F.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- Swansea University (GB)
- University of Oslo (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Polinder, Suzanne
- Venue
- BMC Public Health
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 783-783
- ISSN
- 1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3019196
- OpenAlex
- W2146155562
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 2.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007543/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- health-related quality of life, injuries, SF-36, FIM, Glasgow Outcome Scale, EQ-5D, functional status, injury recovery, population health impact
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Wounds and Injuries, Young Adult
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