| Title |
Quality of life in a broader perspective: Does ASCOT reflect the capability approach?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-017-1756-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. S. van Loon, K. M. van Leeuwen, R. W. J. G. Ostelo, J. E. Bosmans, G. A. M. Widdershoven |
| Abstract |
Economic evaluation of services and interventions in care services tends to focus on quality of life(QoL) based on health-related measures such as EQ5D, with a major focus on health and functioning. The Capability Approach (CA) provides an alternative framework for measuring QoL and challenges some of the conventional issues in the current practice of measurement of QoL. The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) aims to measure social care-related QoL in a broad sense. This article investigates whether and, if so, how the ASCOT addresses issues put on the agenda by the CA. Literature analysis concerning theoretical assumptions and arguments of CA and ASCOT. The Capability Approach (CA) puts three issues on the agenda regarding QoL. First, the focus of evaluation should not be on functioning, but on freedom of choice. Second, evaluation should be critical about adaptive preferences, which entail that people lower expectations in situations of limited possibilities. Third, evaluation should not only address health, but also other domains of life. Our analysis shows that freedom of choice is reflected in the response option 'as I want' in the ASCOT questionnaire. The problem of adaptive preferences is countered in the ASCOT by developing a standard based on preferences of the general population. Third, the ASCOT contains several domains of life. We conclude that the CA and the ASCOT contribute to the discussion on QoL, and that the ASCOT operationalizes core assumptions of the CA, translating the issues raised by the CA in a practical way. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 3 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,336,708
of 23,414,653 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#160
of 2,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,557
of 441,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#8
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,414,653 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,940 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.