Reviewgold2020

Quality of life and mortality in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aung Zaw Zaw Phyo · Rosanne Freak‐Poli · Heather Craig · Danijela Gašević · Nigel Stocks · David Alejandro González‐Chica +1 more

243 citations0/0 files storedBMC Public Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Health disparities and outcomes Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life Health and Well-being Studies

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) is multi-dimensional concept of an individual' general well-being status in relation to their value, environment, cultural and social context in which they live. This study aimed to quantitatively synthesise available evidence on the association between QoL and mortality in the general population. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using three bibliographic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Inclusion criteria were studies that assessed QoL using standardized tools and examined mortality risk in a non-patient population. Qualitative data synthesis and meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed. RESULTS: Of 4184 articles identified, 47 were eligible for inclusion, involving approximately 1,200,000 participants. Studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of QoL measures, population characteristics and data analysis. In total, 43 studies (91.5%) reported that better QoL was associated with lower mortality risk. The results of four meta-analyses indicated that higher health-related QoL (HRQoL) is associated with lower mortality risk, which was consistent for overall HRQoL (HR 0.633, 95% CI: 0.514 to 0.780), physical function (HR 0.987, 95% CI: 0.982 to 0.992), physical component score (OR 0.950, 95% CI: 0.935 to 0.965), and mental component score (OR 0.980, 95% CI: 0.969 to 0.992). CONCLUSION: These findings provide evidence that better QoL/HRQoL was associated with lower mortality risk. The utility of these measures in predicting mortality risk indicates that they should be considered further as potential screening tools in general clinical practice, beyond the traditional objective measures such as body mass index and the results of laboratory tests.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 243 citations exist upstream.

References

2009The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration 1995The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization 2016Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference?2012Healthy life expectancy for 187 countries, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden Disease Study 2010 2000A Comparative Review of Generic Quality-of-Life Instruments 2005Predicting Mortality and Healthcare Utilization with a Single Question 2010An international registry of systematic-review protocols

Cited by

2021Predictors and consequences of loneliness during the COVID-19 Pandemic 2025Awareness, knowledge, and motivations about lifespan, healthspan, and Healthy Longevity Medicine in the general population: the HEalthy LOngevity (HELO) conceptual framework 2025Critical Review of the Habit Theory in Substance Use Disorder and Application of Moors' Goal-Directed Theory

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.