Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article addresses issues that have bearing on the measurement of quality of life as an outcome of speech rehabilitation. The construct should be measured with a questionnaire(s) that captures the patient's perspective; is valid, reliable, and sensitive to changes in the discrepancy or “gap” between present experience and rehabilitation expectations; is compatible with adaptive rehabilitation strategies and goals; measures the dimensions of psychological well-being, physical well-being, body image concerns, social concerns, financial concerns, and communication; realistically focuses on those dimensions of quality of life that clinicians can expect to impact; and is repeated at critical but realistic intervals bearing in mind subject attrition.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Padilla et al. (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: