Empirical evidence for using subjective quality of life as an outcome variable in clinical studies: A meta-analysis of correlates and predictors in persons with a major mental disorder living in the community

This paper presents data from a systematic review and meta-analysis of published quality of life (QOL) studies on the subjective general well-being (GWB) of persons with major mental disorder (MMD) who live in the community. Four research questions were addressed: (1) What is the subjective QOL in persons with MMD who live in the community? (2) Are any specific subjective subdomains of QOL superior predictors of subjective GWB? (3) Is there an association between measures of psychopathology and subjective GWB? (4) Is there an association between sociodemographic variables and subjective GWB? We initially considered 134 potentially relevant articles, but only 42 studies reporting on 49 study units (N = 6774 persons with MMD) met criteria of acceptable quality or relevance to be included in the meta-analysis. First, we found that measures of subjective GWB were relatively high. Second, certain subdomains such as Leisure and Social relations were strong predictors of subjective GWB, while the links between both Personal safety and Work, and GWB were weak. Third, we found that the empirical basis for using subjective QOL as an outcome variable in clinical research is scant. In particular, the relationship between changes in measures of psychopathology and subjective QOL appears to be obscure. Finally, the present study failed to confirm any stable relationship between sociodemographic factors and subjective GWB in persons with MMD who live in the community. Consequences of the findings for clinical practice and research are discussed. Limitations inherent in the meta-analytic approach in general, and the lack of homogeneity in the reviewed studies, need to be considered when interpreting the results of this meta-analysis.