Literature DB >> 10474281

Comparing the psychometric properties of preference-based and nonpreference-based health-related quality of life in coronary heart disease. Canadian Collaborative Cardiac Assessment Group.

L Lalonde1, A E Clarke, L Joseph, T Mackenzie, S A Grover.   

Abstract

A cross-sectional survey (n = 878) was conducted to compare the psychometric properties of three preference-based and one nonpreference-based health-related quality of life measures among healthy subjects with and without treatment for dyslipidemia and/or hypertension and patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). All measures were stable over a 3 to 6 week period. Compared to the Time Trade-off (TTO) and the Standard Gamble (SG), the Rating Scale (RS) correlated with the SF-36 Health Survey most highly. In contrast to the SF-36 General Health Perception (GHP), the SF-36 Physical Component scale and the RS, the TTO and SG were less able to discriminate CHD patients with various levels of physical disability. Only the SF-36 GHP subscale and the RS were able to differentiate healthy participants from participants receiving dyslipidemia and/or hypertension treatment. Neither the SF-36 Physical or Mental Component scales were able to discriminate these two groups. Overall, these results suggest that unlike the RS, the TTO and the SG, as administered in this study, may not be sufficiently sensitive to measure the impact of primary cardiovascular disease prevention strategies on the health-related quality of life of the participants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10474281     DOI: 10.1023/a:1008991816278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  41 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.  Functional status versus utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J Tsevat; L Goldman; G A Lamas; M A Pfeffer; C C Chapin; K F Connors; T H Lee
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 3.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  M C Weinstein; J E Siegel; M R Gold; M S Kamlet; L B Russell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-10-16       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Health status and hypertension: a population-based study.

Authors:  W F Lawrence; D G Fryback; P A Martin; R Klein; B E Klein
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Angina patients' ratings of current health and health without angina: associations with severity of angina and comorbidity.

Authors:  A Y Chen; J Daley; G E Thibault
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1996 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population.

Authors:  A L Stewart; R D Hays; J E Ware
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  A comparison of time trade-off and quality of life measures in patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  D J Perez; R McGee; A V Campbell; E A Christensen; S Williams
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 8.  Measuring health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; D H Feeny; D L Patrick
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1993-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Comparison of an aggressive (U.S.) and a less aggressive (Canadian) policy for cholesterol screening and treatment.

Authors:  M Krahn; C D Naylor; A S Basinski; A S Detsky
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-08-15       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Health values of patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Relationship to mental health and physical functioning.

Authors:  J Tsevat; J G Solzan; K M Kuntz; J Ragland; J S Currier; R L Sell; M C Weinstein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  11 in total

1.  Adjusting distributions of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 utility scores of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Jian Sun
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Quality of life with macular degeneration: perceptions of patients, clinicians, and community members.

Authors:  J D Stein; M M Brown; G C Brown; H Hollands; S Sharma
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Validation of the EuroQol questionnaire in cardiac rehabilitation.

Authors:  B Schweikert; H Hahmann; R Leidl
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-03-29       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Optimal Medical Therapy for Stable Angina in Advanced CKD: A Decision Analysis.

Authors:  Aisha Khattak; Ernest I Mandel; Matthew R Reynolds; David M Charytan
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 8.860

5.  Long-term health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of coronary CT angiography in patients with suspicion for acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Alexander Goehler; Thomas Mayrhofer; Amit Pursnani; Maros Ferencik; Heidi S Lumish; Cordula Barth; Júlia Karády; Benjamin Chow; Quynh A Truong; James E Udelson; Jerome L Fleg; John T Nagurney; G Scott Gazelle; Udo Hoffmann
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2019-06-25

6.  Health-related quality of life in cardiac patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension.

Authors:  Lyne Lalonde; Annette O'Connor; Lawrence Joseph; Steven A Grover
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  The impact of obesity on diabetes, hyperlipidemia and hypertension in the United States.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Vahram H Ghushchyan; Rami Ben-Joseph
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  The quality of life of patients with hypertension.

Authors:  J D Stein; G C Brown; M M Brown; S Sharma; H Hollands; H D Stein
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Construct validity of the interview time trade-off and computer time trade-off in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional observational pilot study.

Authors:  Laurien Buitinga; Louise Ma Braakman-Jansen; Erik Taal; Mart Afj van de Laar
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Overcoming inherent problems of preference-based techniques for measuring health benefits: an empirical study in the context of kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Nick Kontodimopoulos; Dimitris Niakas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-01-14       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.