Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The ‘states versus weights’ dilemma in quality of life measurement

  • Editorial
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Detsky AS, Nagle IG. A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Annals Inter Med 1990; 113: 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the EuroQol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: xxx-xxx.

    Google Scholar 

  3. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol—A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality-of-life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199–208.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Stewart AL, Sherbourne CD, Hays RD, et al. Summary and discussion of MOS measures. In: Stewart AL, Ware JE, (eds). Measuring functioning and well-being: the Medical Outcomes Study approach. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1992: 345–371.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473–483.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0; Submitted for publication.

  7. Bozzette S, Duan N, Berry SH, Kanouse DE. Analytic difficulties in applying quality of life outcomes to clinical trials of therapy for HIV disease. Psychology and Health; in press.

  8. Revicki DA. Relationship between health utility and psychometric health status measures. Med Care 1992; 30: MS274-MS282.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Social Policy Department, RAND, 1700 Main Street, 90407-2138, Santa Monica, CA, USA

    R. D. Hays, C. D. Sherbourne & G. N. Marshall

  2. University of California, San Francisco, (UCSF), 3rd and Parnassus Aves, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA

    A. L. Stewart

Authors
  1. R. D. Hays
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. L. Stewart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. D. Sherbourne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. N. Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of RAND or UCSF.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hays, R.D., Stewart, A.L., Sherbourne, C.D. et al. The ‘states versus weights’ dilemma in quality of life measurement. Qual Life Res 2, 167–168 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435220

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435220

Search

Navigation