↓ Skip to main content

The ‘new normal’: relativity of quality of life judgments in individuals with bipolar disorder—a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
The ‘new normal’: relativity of quality of life judgments in individuals with bipolar disorder—a qualitative study
Published in
Quality of Life Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11136-018-1811-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma Morton, Erin Michalak, Rachelle Hole, Simone Buzwell, Greg Murray

Abstract

Quality of life (QoL) is increasingly a target of interventions for bipolar disorders (BD). While the subjective experience of consumers is often elevated as central to the construct of QoL in BD, limited investigation in this area means subjective QoL remains poorly understood. The present qualitative study seeks to address this by investigating how people with BD appraise the quality of their lives in the context of a QoL self-management intervention. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 individuals who had participated in a self-management intervention for improving QoL in BD. Individuals were questioned about experiences of the intervention and perceptions of their QoL. Thematic analysis was used to explore participants' appraisal of their QoL. An overarching theme concerned the intrinsic relativity of subjective QoL: individuals located QoL as relative to self, others and possible futures. Incorporating illness-related reference points for QoL ('given my circumstances…') was associated with perceptions of improved QoL. Deliberately modifying reference points for QoL was perceived as self-compassionate. The present study generates novel hypotheses about how individuals with BD make sense of their QoL. Data suggest that individuals located their QoL relative to a variety of reference points, use of which was flexible. In accord with gap theories of QoL, individuals experienced acceptance of illness impacts as improving subjective sense of QoL. Rather than 'settling for' a lower standard of QoL, individuals experienced these changes as adaptive and positive. Findings are discussed in relation to the measurement and amelioration of QoL in BD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 20 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 May 2018.
All research outputs
#7,964,395
of 24,848,516 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#870
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,691
of 455,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#30
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,848,516 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 455,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.