Literature DB >> 10146938

Quality of life instruments in the evaluation of new drugs.

R Jaeschke1, G H Guyatt, D Cook.   

Abstract

The importance of measuring changes in a patient's quality of life when evaluating the efficacy of new drugs is increasingly recognised. In this paper, we review the steps associated with this process--recognising the opportunity and the need to include quality of life instruments during the investigation, choosing the most suitable instrument(s) and interpreting the results. To be useful in clinical trials, quality of life measures must be both responsive (able to detect all important differences) and valid. Generic instruments are applicable to a wide variety of populations but may lack responsiveness. Disease-specific instruments are more likely to be responsive and are directly relevant to patients and clinicians. The approach to measurement in a specific clinical trial should be dictated by the goals of the investigators.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 10146938     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199201020-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  39 in total

Review 1.  Measuring quality of life in clinical trials: a taxonomy and review.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; S J Veldhuyzen Van Zanten; D H Feeny; D L Patrick
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1989-06-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  The n-of-1 randomized controlled trial: clinical usefulness. Our three-year experience.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; J L Keller; R Jaeschke; D Rosenbloom; J D Adachi; M T Newhouse
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1990-02-15       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance.

Authors:  R A Deyo; R M Centor
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1986

4.  A methodological framework for assessing health indices.

Authors:  B Kirshner; G Guyatt
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1985

5.  Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; C Bombardier; P X Tugwell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1986-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Measurement of values for states of health with linear analog scales.

Authors:  H J Sutherland; V Dunn; N F Boyd
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  The measurement of patients' values in medicine.

Authors:  H Llewellyn-Thomas; H J Sutherland; R Tibshirani; A Ciampi; J E Till; N F Boyd
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; L B Berman; M Townsend; S O Pugsley; L W Chambers
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 9.139

9.  Auranofin therapy and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Results of a multicenter trial.

Authors:  C Bombardier; J Ware; I J Russell; M Larson; A Chalmers; J L Read
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 4.965

10.  How should we judge the efficacy of drug therapy in patients with chronic congestive heart failure? The insights of six blind men.

Authors:  M Packer
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  27 in total

1.  Economic constraints and prescribing patterns in New Zealand.

Authors:  G S Kellaway
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Statistical versus quantitative significance in the socioeconomic evaluation of medicines.

Authors:  B J O'Brien; M F Drummond
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Expanding the role of pharmacists in pharmacoeconomics: why and how?

Authors:  L A Sanchez
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Principles of quality of life assessment in cancer chemotherapy.

Authors:  B R Cassileth
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Evaluation of pharmaceutical innovation: challenges and opportunities arising from the reforms to the national health service in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  S St Leger; K Rowsell; V Standing; A Haycox
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Health-related quality of life in pharmaceutical evaluation: forging progress and avoiding pitfalls.

Authors:  D L Patrick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Institutional formularies: the relevance of pharmacoeconomic analysis to formulary decisions.

Authors:  R J Lipsy
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  The reliability of cost-utility estimates in cost-per-QALY league tables .

Authors:  S Petrou; M Malek; P G Davey
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Selection of items and avoidance of bias in quality of life scales.

Authors:  M E Hyland
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Meta-analysis and quality of evidence in the economic evaluation of drug trials.

Authors:  R J Simes; P P Glasziou
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.