Conceptualisation and Measurement of Quality of Life Based on Schalock and Verdugo’s Model: A Cross-Disciplinary Review of the Literature

Nele Van Hecke (), Claudia Claes, Wouter Vanderplasschen, Jessica De Maeyer, Nico De Witte and Stijn Vandevelde
Additional contact information
Nele Van Hecke: Ghent University
Claudia Claes: Ghent University College
Wouter Vanderplasschen: Ghent University
Jessica De Maeyer: Ghent University College
Nico De Witte: Ghent University College
Stijn Vandevelde: Ghent University

Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, 2018, vol. 137, issue 1, No 16, 335-351

Abstract: Abstract Researchers in the medical and social sciences have shown a rapidly growing interest in the concept of Quality of Life (QoL) in the past few decades. Reasons include its potential as an outcome measure of service delivery, and the opportunity of using a shared language both within and between different disciplines. Despite the widespread use of QoL in research, practice and policy development, there is little agreement on the defining aspects, as well as on the operationalization of the concept. In an attempt to broaden the knowledge on QoL and to give an overview of interdisciplinary consensus- and discussion aspects, a review of peer-reviewed QoL-reviews, indexed in Web of Science, and published from 2000 to 2013 (n = 75) was carried out. Theoretical and measurement principles, derived from the QoL-framework of Schalock and Verdugo (Handbook on quality of life for human service practitioners, American Association on Mental Retardation, Washington, 2002) were systematically explored. Results indicate a growing interdisciplinary consensus on QoL as (1) a multidimensional construct, (2) composed of both objective and subjective dimensions, (3) with an emphasis on the subjective evaluation of one’s life circumstances, (4) which is dynamic in nature and (5) which can be influenced and enhanced by a variety of factors, implying a positive view on social services. Contrary, debate is still going on (1) the ideal method to assess QoL, (2) the use of proxies in QoL-measurement and (3) the preference for a general or on the contrary disease- or target group specific QoL-instrument.

Keywords: Quality of life; Interdisciplinary; Review; Conceptualisation; Measurement (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-017-1596-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:soinre:v:137:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-017-1596-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135

DOI: 10.1007/s11205-017-1596-2

Access Statistics for this article

Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement is currently edited by Filomena Maggino

More articles in Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().