<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:extra="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/feeds/mostaccessed/journal?quantity=&amp;format=rss&amp;version=">
        <title>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes - Most accessed articles</title>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com</link>
        <description>The most accessed research articles published by Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</description>
        <dc:date>2011-02-04T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/29" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/60" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/63" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/9/1/8" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/32" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/3/1/1" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/20" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/44" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/66" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/64" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/29">
        <title>The Hospital Anxiety And Depression Scale</title>
        <description>There is a need to assess the contribution of mood disorder, especially anxiety and depression, in order to understand the experience of suffering in the setting of medical practice.Most physicians are aware of this aspect of the illness of their patients but many feel incompetent to provide the patient with reliable information. The Hospital Anxiety And Depression Scale, or HADS, was designed to provide a simple yet reliable tool for use in medical practice. The term &apos;hospital&apos; in its title suggests that it is only valid in such a setting but many studies conducted throughout the world have confirmed that it is valid when used in community settings and primary care medical practice.It should be emphasised that self-assessment scales are only valid for screening purposes; definitive diagnosis must rest on the process of clinical examination.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/29</link>
                <dc:creator>Richard Snaith</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003, null:29</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2003-08-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-29</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-1-29-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>29</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2003-08-01T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/60">
        <title>The Quality of Life Scale (QOLS): Reliability, Validity, and Utilization</title>
        <description>The Quality of Life Scale (QOLS), created originally by American psychologist John Flanagan in the 1970&apos;s, has been adapted for use in chronic illness groups. This paper reviews the development and psychometric testing of the QOLS. A descriptive review of the published literature was undertaken and findings summarized in the frequently asked questions format. Reliability, content and construct validity testing has been performed on the QOLS and a number of translations have been made. The QOLS has low to moderate correlations with physical health status and disease measures. However, content validity analysis indicates that the instrument measures domains that diverse patient groups with chronic illness define as quality of life. The QOLS is a valid instrument for measuring quality of life across patient groups and cultures and is conceptually distinct from health status or other causal indicators of quality of life.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/60</link>
                <dc:creator>Carol Burckhardt</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kathryn Anderson</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003, null:60</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2003-10-23T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-60</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-1-60-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>60</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2003-10-23T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/63">
        <title>The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation </title>
        <description>Background:
There is increasing international interest in the concept of mental well-being and its contribution to all aspects of human life. Demand for instruments to monitor mental well-being at a population level and evaluate mental health promotion initiatives is growing. This article describes the development and validation of a new scale, comprised only of positively worded items relating to different aspects of positive mental health: the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS).
Methods:
WEMWBS was developed by an expert panel drawing on current academic literature, qualitative research with focus groups, and psychometric testing of an existing scale. It was validated on a student and representative population sample. Content validity was assessed by reviewing the frequency of complete responses and the distribution of responses to each item. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the scale measured a single construct. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach&apos;s alpha. Criterion validity was explored in terms of correlations between WEMWBS and other scales and by testing whether the scale discriminated between population groups in line with pre-specified hypotheses. Test-retest reliability was assessed at one week using intra-class correlation coefficients. Susceptibility to bias was measured using the Balanced Inventory of Desired Responding.
Results:
WEMWBS showed good content validity. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the single factor hypothesis. A Cronbach&apos;s alpha score of 0.89 (student sample) and 0.91 (population sample) suggests some item redundancy in the scale. WEMWBS showed high correlations with other mental health and well-being scales and lower correlations with scales measuring overall health. Its distribution was near normal and the scale did not show ceiling effects in a population sample. It discriminated between population groups in a way that is largely consistent with the results of other population surveys. Test-retest reliability at one week was high (0.83). Social desirability bias was lower or similar to that of other comparable scales.
Conclusion:
WEMWBS is a measure of mental well-being focusing entirely on positive aspects of mental health. As a short and psychometrically robust scale, with no ceiling effects in a population sample, it offers promise as a tool for monitoring mental well-being at a population level. Whilst WEMWBS should appeal to those evaluating mental health promotion initiatives, it is important that the scale&apos;s sensitivity to change is established before it is recommended in this context.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/63</link>
                <dc:creator>Ruth Tennant</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Louise Hiller</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ruth Fishwick</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Stephen Platt</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Stephen Joseph</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Scott Weich</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jane Parkinson</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jenny Secker</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sarah Stewart-Brown</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2007, null:63</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2007-11-27T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-5-63</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-5-63-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>63</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2007-11-27T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/9/1/8">
        <title>A methodological review of resilience measurement scales</title>
        <description>Background:
The evaluation of interventions and policies designed to promote resilience, and research to understand the determinants and associations, require reliable and valid measures to ensure data quality. This paper systematically reviews the psychometric rigour of resilience measurement scales developed for use in general and clinical populations.
Methods:
Eight electronic abstract databases and the internet were searched and reference lists of all identified papers were hand searched. The focus was to identify peer reviewed journal articles where resilience was a key focus and/or is assessed. Two authors independently extracted data and performed a quality assessment of the scale psychometric properties.
Results:
Nineteen resilience measures were reviewed; four of these were refinements of the original measure. All the measures had some missing information regarding the psychometric properties. Overall, the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, the Resilience Scale for Adults and the Brief Resilience Scale received the best psychometric ratings. The conceptual and theoretical adequacy of a number of the scales was questionable.
Conclusion:
We found no current &apos;gold standard&apos; amongst 15 measures of resilience. A number of the scales are in the early stages of development, and all require further validation work. Given increasing interest in resilience from major international funders, key policy makers and practice, researchers are urged to report relevant validation statistics when using the measures.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/9/1/8</link>
                <dc:creator>Gill Windle</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kate Bennett</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jane Noyes</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2011, null:8</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-02-04T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-9-8</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-9-8-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>8</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-02-04T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/32">
        <title>Patients&apos; needs, satisfaction, and health related quality of life: Towards a comprehensive model</title>
        <description>With the publication of its 100th paper, the new open access Journal Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (HQLO), achieves a significant milestone. Launching a journal in this field was not just a challenge with respect to nomenclature, but also provided a forum for disseminating research which emphasises the unique contributions as well as the inter-relationships among determinants of health, provision of care, and outcomes. So far, prominence (as measured by the number of scientific manuscripts accepted for publication) has been given mainly to the unique contributions of health-related quality of life (HRQL). Other determinants like health needs and satisfaction have sporadically been considered. A few additional papers have focused on approaches to detect ill health. In this editorial we would like to explore the relationship between needs, satisfaction and quality of life, identify gaps in the current knowledge base, and encourage future research in these areas.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/32</link>
                <dc:creator>Mohsen Asadi-Lari</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Marcello Tamburini</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>David Gray</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2004, null:32</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2004-06-29T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-2-32</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-2-32-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>32</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2004-06-29T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/3/1/1">
        <title>Can the concepts of depression and quality of life be integrated using a time perspective?</title>
        <description>Background:
Little is understood about the conceptual relationship of depression and quality of life (QoL). Judgments concerning both, implicitly or explicitly, involve a time perspective. The aim of this study was to test de Leval&apos;s theoretical model linking depression and QoL with a time perspective. The model predicts that changes in cognitions about one&apos;s past, present and future QoL, will be associated with changes in depressive symptomatology.
Methods:
Eighteen psychiatric in-patients with a clinically confirmed diagnosis of depression were assessed on commencing treatment and 12 weeks later. QoL was assessed by the Schedule for Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL), depression by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and hopelessness by the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS). Time perspective was incorporated by asking QoL questions about the past, present and future.
Results:
Depression and hopelessness were associated with a poorer present QoL. Depression lowered present QoL but did not alter future QoL, as these remained consistently high whether participants were depressed or recovering. However, depressed individuals had a larger gap between their actual present QoL and future (aspired to) QoL. Changes in QoL were influenced by depression and hopelessness. Contrary to the model, perception of &quot;past&quot; QoL was not affected by depression or hopelessness.
Conclusions:
de Leval&apos;s model was largely confirmed. Thus depression and hopelessness influence a person&apos;s present and future QoL. The analysis of a temporal horizon was helpful in understanding the link between depression and QoL.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/3/1/1</link>
                <dc:creator>Margaret Moore</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Stefan Hofer</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Hannah McGee</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lena Ring</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2005, null:1</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2005-01-05T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-3-1</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-3-1-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2005-01-05T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/20">
        <title>The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: Dimensions and Practical Applications</title>
        <description>The ability to effectively measure health-related quality-of-life longitudinally is central to describing the impacts of disease, treatment, or other insults, including normal aging, upon the patient. Over the last two decades, assessment of patient health status has undergone a dramatic paradigm shift, evolving from a predominant reliance on biochemical and physical measurements, such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate, lipid profiles, or radiographs, to an emphasis upon health outcomes based on the patient&apos;s personal appreciation of their illness. The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), published in 1980, was among the first instruments based on generic, patient-centered dimensions. The HAQ was designed to represent a model of patient-oriented outcome assessment and has played a major role in many diverse areas such as prediction of successful aging, inversion of the therapeutic pyramid in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), quantification of NSAID gastropathy, development of risk factor models for osteoarthrosis, and examination of mortality risks in RA.Evidenced by its use over the past two decades in diverse settings, the HAQ has established itself as a valuable, effective, and sensitive tool for measurement of health status. It is available in more than 60 languages and is supported by a bibliography of more than 500 references. It has increased the credibility and use of validated self-report measurement techniques as a quantifiable set of hard data endpoints and has contributed to a new appreciation of outcome assessment. In this article, information regarding the HAQ&apos;s development, content, dissemination and reference sources for its uses, translations, and validations are provided.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/20</link>
                <dc:creator>Bonnie Bruce</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>James Fries</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003, null:20</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2003-06-09T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-20</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-1-20-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>20</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2003-06-09T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/44">
        <title>A systematic review of mobility instruments and their measurement properties for older acute medical patients</title>
        <description>Background:
Independent mobility is a key factor in determining readiness for discharge for older patients following acute hospitalisation and has also been identified as a predictor of many important outcomes for this patient group. This review aimed to identify a physical performance instrument that is not disease specific that has the properties required to accurately measure and monitor the mobility of older medical patients in the acute hospital setting.
Methods:
Databases initially searched were Medline, Cinahl, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials without language restriction or limits on year of publication until July 2005. After analysis of this yield, a second step was the systematic search of Medline, Cinahl and Embase until August 2005 for evidence of the clinical utility of each potentially suitable instrument. Reports were included in this review if instruments described had face validity for measuring from bed bound to independent levels of ambulation, the items were suitable for application in an acute hospital setting and the instrument required observation (rather than self-report) of physical performance. Evidence of the clinical utility of each potentially suitable instrument was considered if data on measurement properties were reported.
Results:
Three instruments, the Elderly Mobility Scale (EMS), Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (HABAM) and the Physical Performance Mobility Examination (PPME) were identified as potentially relevant. Clinimetric evaluation indicated that the HABAM has the most desirable properties of these three instruments. However, the HABAM has the limitation of a ceiling effect in an older acute medical patient population and reliability and minimally clinically important difference (MCID) estimates have not been reported for the Rasch refined HABAM. These limitations support the proposal that a new mobility instrument is required for older acute medical patients.
Conclusion:
No existing instrument has the properties required to accurately measure and monitor mobility of older acute medical patients.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/44</link>
                <dc:creator>Natalie de Morton</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>David Berlowitz</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jennifer Keating</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, null:44</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2008-06-05T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-6-44</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-6-44-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>44</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2008-06-05T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/66">
        <title>The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): translation and validation study of the Iranian version</title>
        <description>Background:
The objective of this study was to translate and to test the reliability and validity of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) in Iran.
Methods:
Using a standard &apos;forward-backward&apos; translation procedure, the English language version of the questionnaire was translated into Persian (Iranian language). Then a sample of young people aged 18 to 25 years old completed the questionnaire. In addition, a short questionnaire containing demographic questions and a single measure of global quality of life was administered. To test reliability the internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach&apos;s alpha coefficient. Validity was performed using convergent validity. Finally, the factor structure of the questionnaire was extracted by performing principal component analysis using oblique factor solution.
Results:
In all 748 young people entered into the study. The mean age of respondents was 21.1 (SD = 2.1) years. Employing the recommended method of scoring (ranging from 0 to 12), the mean GHQ score was 3.7 (SD = 3.5). Reliability analysis showed satisfactory result (Cronbach&apos;s alpha coefficient = 0.87). Convergent validity indicated a significant negative correlation between the GHQ-12 and global quality of life scores as expected (r = -0.56, P &lt; 0.0001). The principal component analysis with oblique rotation solution showed that the GHQ-12 was a measure of psychological morbidity with two-factor structure that jointly accounted for 51% of the variance.
Conclusion:
The study findings showed that the Iranian version of the GHQ-12 has a good structural characteristic and is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used for measuring psychological well being in Iran.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/66</link>
                <dc:creator>Ali Montazeri</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Amir Mahmood Harirchi</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mohammad Shariati</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gholamreza Garmaroudi</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mehdi Ebadi</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Abolfazl Fateh</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003, null:66</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2003-11-13T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-66</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-1-66-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>66</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2003-11-13T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/64">
        <title>The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis</title>
        <description>The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was developed as an extension of the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index with the purpose of evaluating short-term and long-term symptoms and function in subjects with knee injury and osteoarthritis. The KOOS holds five separately scored subscales: Pain, other Symptoms, Function in daily living (ADL), Function in Sport and Recreation (Sport/Rec), and knee-related Quality of Life (QOL). The KOOS has been validated for several orthopaedic interventions such as anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, meniscectomy and total knee replacement. In addition the instrument has been used to evaluate physical therapy, nutritional supplementation and glucosamine supplementation. The effect size is generally largest for the subscale QOL followed by the subscale Pain. The KOOS is a valid, reliable and responsive self-administered instrument that can be used for short-term and long-term follow-up of several types of knee injury including osteoarthritis. The measure is relatively new and further use of the instrument will add knowledge and suggest areas that need to be further explored and improved.</description>
        <link>http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/64</link>
                <dc:creator>Ewa Roos</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>L Lohmander</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003, null:64</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2003-11-03T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-64</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1477-7525-1-64-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Health and Quality of Life Outcomes</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1477-7525</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>64</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2003-11-03T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
    </cc:License>
</rdf:RDF>

