The Use of a Comprehensive Concept of Capability for Wellbeing Assessment: A Best-Fit Framework Synthesis.
Best-fit framework synthesis
Capability approach
Health economics
Outcome measurement
Patient-reported outcomes
Quality of life
Journal
Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy
ISSN: 1573-3394
Titre abrégé: Health Care Anal
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9432537
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Aug 2024
19 Aug 2024
Historique:
accepted:
23
07
2024
medline:
19
8
2024
pubmed:
19
8
2024
entrez:
19
8
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Developing an instrument with the capability approach can be challenging, since the capability concept of Sen is ambiguous concerning the burdens that people experience whilst achieving their capabilities. A solution is to develop instruments with a comprehensive concept of capability, such as the concept of 'option-freedom'. This study aims to develop a theoretical framework for instrument development with the concept of option-freedom. A best-fit framework synthesis was conducted with seven qualitative papers by one researcher. Two researchers supported the synthesis by discussing interim results during the synthesis. A priori concepts of option-freedom were used to deductively code against. Themes and subthemes were developed inductively when data did not match a priori themes. Seven paper were identified that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Four themes emerged from the synthesis. (1) Option Wellbeing represents a range of options that need to be satisfied for individuals to experience wellbeing. (2) Self-Realization represents that there are experiences in an individual's life that have value beyond realizing options. (3) Perceived Access to Options represents the perceived ability of individuals to realize freedoms. (4) Perceived Control represents the experience of having control. Developing an instrument with the proposed framework has two benefits. First, it acknowledges the importance of assessing impediments in realizing capabilities for wellbeing assessment. Secondly, the themes form a broad informational base by including themes related to subjective wellbeing. Future research should study the feasibility of implementing the framework for instrument development.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39158650
doi: 10.1007/s10728-024-00488-w
pii: 10.1007/s10728-024-00488-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Banta, D. (2009). What is technology assessment? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25(S1), 7–9.
doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090333
pubmed: 19519979
Banta, D. (2003). The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy, 63(2), 121–132.
doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00059-3
pubmed: 12543525
Coast, J., Bailey, C., & Kinghorn, P. (2018). Patient centered outcome measurement in health economics: beyond EQ-5D and the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year—where are we now? Annals of Palliative Medicine, 7, S249–S252.
doi: 10.21037/apm.2018.03.18
pubmed: 29860853
Lorgelly, P. K., Lawson, K. D., Fenwick, E. A., & Briggs, A. H. (2010). Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of public health interventions: a role for the capability approach? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 7(5), 2274–2289.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph7052274
pubmed: 20623024
pmcid: 2898049
Coast, J., Smith, R., & Lorgelly, P. (2008). Should the capability approach be applied in health economics? Health Economics, 17(6), 667–670.
doi: 10.1002/hec.1359
pubmed: 18457341
Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: the Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.
Sen, A. (1984). The Living Standard. Oxford Economic Papers, 36, 74–90.
doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041662
Robeyns, I. (2017). Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined (pp. 98–107). Open Book Publishers.
doi: 10.11647/OBP.0130
Ubels, J., Hernandez-Villafuerte, K., & Schlander, M. (2022). The value of freedom: a review of the current developments and conceptual issues in the measurement of capability. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 23(3), 327–353.
Pettit, P. (2003). Agency-freedom and option-freedom. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 15(4), 387–403.
doi: 10.1177/0951692803154003
Carroll, C., Booth, A., Leaviss, J., & Rick, J. (2013). “Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 37.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-37
pubmed: 23497061
pmcid: 3618126
Tong, A., Flemming, K., McInnes, E., Oliver, S., & Craig, J. (2012). Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12(1), 181.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-181
pubmed: 23185978
pmcid: 3552766
Schlosser, R. W., Wendt, O., Bhavnani, S., & Nail-Chiwetalu, B. (2006). Use of information-seeking strategies for developing systematic reviews and engaging in evidence-based practice: the application of traditional and comprehensive pearl growing. A review. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 41(5), 567–82.
doi: 10.1080/13682820600742190
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357.
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
pubmed: 17872937
Carroll, C., & Booth, A. (2015). Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed? Research Synthesis Methods, 6(2), 149–154.
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1128
pubmed: 26099483
Verhage, A., & Boels, D. (2017). Critical appraisal of mixed methods research studies in a systematic scoping review on plural policing: Assessing the impact of excluding inadequately reported studies by means of a sensitivity analysis. Quality & Quantity, 51(4), 1449–1468.
doi: 10.1007/s11135-016-0345-y
Kinghorn, P., Robinson, A., & Smith, R. D. (2015). Developing a capability-based questionnaire for assessing well-being in patients with chronic pain. Social Indicators Research, 120(3), 897–916.
doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0625-7
Kibel, M., & Vanstone, M. (2017). Reconciling ethical and economic conceptions of value in health policy using the capabilities approach: a qualitative investigation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Social Science & Medicine, 195, 97–104.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.11.024
Al-Janabi, H., Flynn, T. N., & Coast, J. (2012). Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: the ICECAP-A. Quality of Life Research, 21(1), 167–76.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9927-2
pubmed: 21598064
Grewal, I., Lewis, J., Flynn, T., Brown, J., Bond, J., & Coast, J. (2006). Developing attributes for a generic quality of life measure for older people: Preferences or capabilities? Social Science & Medicine, 62(8), 1891–1901.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.023
Sutton, E. J., & Coast, J. (2014). Development of a supportive care measure for economic evaluation of end-of-life care using qualitative methods. Palliative Medicine, 28(2), 151–157.
doi: 10.1177/0269216313489368
pubmed: 23698452
Greco, G., Skordis-Worrall, J., Mkandawire, B., & Mills, A. (2015). What is a good life? Selecting capabilities to assess women’s quality of life in rural Malawi. Social Science & Medicine, 130, 69–78.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.042
Engström, S., Leksell, M., Johansson, J., & Unn-Britt, Soffia G. (2016). What is important for you? A qualitative interview study of living with diabetes and experiences of diabetes care to establish a basis for a tailored patient-reported outcome measure for the Swedish National Diabetes Register. BMJ Open, 6(3), e010249.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010249
Lorgelly, P. K., Lorimer, K., Fenwick, E. A. L., Briggs, A. H., & Anand, P. (2015). Operationalising the capability approach as an outcome measure in public health: the development of the OCAP-18. Social Science & Medicine, 142, 68–81.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.08.002
Simon, J., Anand, P., Gray, A., Rugkåsa, J., Yeeles, K., & Burns, T. (2013). Operationalising the capability approach for outcome measurement in mental health research. Social Science & Medicine, 98, 187–196.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.09.019
Netten, A., Burge, P., Malley, J., Potoglou, D., Towers, A.-M., Brazier, J., et al. (2012). Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure. Health Technology Assessment, 16(16), 1–166.
doi: 10.3310/hta16160
pubmed: 22459668
Månsdotter, A., Ekman, B., Feldman, I., Hagberg, L., Hurtig, A.-K., & Lindholm, L. (2017). We propose a novel measure for social welfare and public health: capability-adjusted life-years, CALYs. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 15(4), 437–440.
doi: 10.1007/s40258-017-0323-0
pubmed: 28374165
Rijke, W. J., Vermeulen, A. M., Wendrich, K., Mylanus, E., Langereis, M. C., & van der Wilt, G. J. (2021). Capability of deaf children with a cochlear implant. Disability and Rehabilitation, 43(14), 1989–1994.
doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1689580
pubmed: 31724886
Bellanca, N., Biggeri, M., & Marchetta, F. (2011). An extension of the capability approach: towards a theory of dis-capability. Alter, 5(3), 158–176.
doi: 10.1016/j.alter.2011.05.001
Gibbins, J., Bhatia, R., Forbes, K., & Reid, C. M. (2014). What do patients with advanced incurable cancer want from the management of their pain? A qualitative study. Palliative Medicine, 28(1), 71–78.
doi: 10.1177/0269216313486310
pubmed: 23670721
Albrecht, G. L., & Devlieger, P. J. (1999). The disability paradox: high quality of life against all odds. Social Science & Medicine, 48(8), 977–988.
doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00411-0
Zeppetella, G. (1999). How do terminally ill patients at home take their medication? Palliative Medicine, 13(6), 469–475.
doi: 10.1191/026921699675653923
pubmed: 10715753
Vallerand, A. H., Saunders, M. M., & Anthony, M. (2007). Perceptions of control over pain by patients with cancer and their caregivers. Pain Management Nursing, 8(2), 55–63.
doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2007.02.001
pubmed: 17544124
Connell, J., Brazier, J., O’Cathain, A., Lloyd-Jones, M., & Paisley, S. (2012). Quality of life of people with mental health problems: a synthesis of qualitative research. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10(1), 138.
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-138
pubmed: 23173689
pmcid: 3563466
Luhmann, M., Hofmann, W., Eid, M., & Lucas, R. E. (2012). Subjective well-being and adaptation to life events: a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 592.
doi: 10.1037/a0025948
pubmed: 22059843
Mitchell, P. (2018). Adaptive preferences, adapted preferences. Mind, 127(508), 1003–1025.
doi: 10.1093/mind/fzy020
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Social Science & Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515.
doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00045-3
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542
pubmed: 6399758
Qizilbash, M. (2002). Development, common foes and shared values. Review of Political Economy, 14(4), 463–480.
doi: 10.1080/0953825022000009906
Clark, D. A. (2005). Sen’s capability approach and the many spaces of human well-being. The Journal of Development Studies, 41(8), 1339–1368.
doi: 10.1080/00220380500186853
Cookson, R. (2005). QALYs and the capability approach. Health Economics, 14(8), 817–829.
doi: 10.1002/hec.975
pubmed: 15693028