| Title |
Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Milad Karimi, John Brazier |
| Abstract |
The terms health, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and quality of life (QoL) used interchangeably. Given that these are three key terms in the literature, their appropriate and clear use is important. This paper reviews the history and definitions of the terms and considers how they have been used. It is argued that the definitions of HRQoL in the literature are problematic because some definitions fail to distinguish between HRQoL and health or between HRQoL and QoL. Many so-called HRQoL questionnaires actually measure self-perceived health status and the use of the phrase QoL is unjustified. It is concluded that the concept of HRQoL as used now is confusing. A potential solution is to define HRQoL as the way health is empirically estimated to affect QoL or use the term to only signify the utility associated with a health state. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 14 | 50% |
| Australia | 4 | 14% |
| Ireland | 2 | 7% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 61% |
| Scientists | 9 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 2174 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 300 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 257 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 193 | 9% |
| Researcher | 122 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 105 | 5% |
| Other | 337 | 15% |
| Unknown | 864 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 423 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 288 | 13% |
| Psychology | 139 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 58 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 52 | 2% |
| Other | 281 | 13% |
| Unknown | 937 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 18 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,899,501
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#125
of 2,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,668
of 312,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#4
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 312,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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.