RT Article
T1 FELICITOMETRY: MEASURING THE ‘QUALITY’ IN QUALITY OF LIFE
JF Bioethics
VO 22
IS 6
SP 307
OP 313
A1 Kowalski, Charles
A1 Pennell, Steven
A1 Vinokur, Amiram
A2 Pennell, Steven
A2 Vinokur, Amiram
LA English
YR 2008
UL https://ixtheo.de/Record/1781881170
AB Following Bernheim,1 we examine aspects of ‘felicitometrics,’2 the measurement of the ‘quality’ term in Quality of Life (QOL). Bernheim argued that overall QOL is best captured as the Gestalt3 of a global self-assessment and suggested that the Anamnestic Comparative Self Assessment (ACSA) approach, in which subjects' memories of the best and worst times of their lives are used to anchor a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), provided a serious answer to the serious question, ‘How have you been?’ Bernheim compares and contrasts the ACSA to multi-item questionnaire QOL instruments, such as the SF-36, concluding that the ACSA has a number of advantages. His discussion assumes that the use of QOL outcomes in clinical trials is both relevant and appropriate. In the present paper, we document the reasonableness of this latter assumption,4 contribute to the characterization of the similarities and differences between multi-item and individualized QOL instruments, and point to some other individualized instruments that may be used in clinical trial contexts. These ‘other individualized instruments’ differ from the ACSA in fundamental ways; but they are individualized in that the subject defines those areas in his/her life that are most important, and these may vary from subject-to-subject.
K1 Ethics
K1 Outcome variables
K1 Clinical Trials
K1 Quality of life
K1 Measurement
DO 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00642.x