Literature DB >> 11533441

Preferences and understanding their effects on health.

K McPherson1, A Britton.   

Abstract

Preference for a particular intervention may, possibly via complicated pathways, itself confer an outcome advantage which will be subsumed in unblind randomised trials as part of the measured effectiveness of the intervention. Where more attractive interventions are compared with less attractive ones, any difference could therefore be a consequence of attractiveness and not its intrinsic worth. For health promotion interventions this is clearly important, but we cannot tell how important it is for therapeutic interventions without special studies to measure or refute such effects. These are difficult to do and are complex. Until the therapeutic effects of preference itself are more clearly understood, understanding the true therapeutic effects will be compromised, at least in principle.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11533441      PMCID: PMC1765745          DOI: 10.1136/qhc.0100061..

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Health Care        ISSN: 0963-8172


  21 in total

1.  Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy, and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression. I: clinical effectiveness.

Authors:  E Ward; M King; M Lloyd; P Bower; B Sibbald; S Farrelly; M Gabbay; N Tarrier; J Addington-Hall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-12-02

2.  Choosing the best research design for each question.

Authors:  D L Sackett; J E Wennberg
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997 Dec 20-27

3.  What is the prior probability of a proposed new treatment being superior to established treatments?

Authors:  I Chalmers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-01-04

4.  Patients' preferences and randomised trials.

Authors:  W A Silverman; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-01-20       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Equipoise and the ethics of randomization.

Authors:  R J Lilford; J Jackson
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Patient preferences in randomised trials: threat or opportunity?

Authors:  D J Torgerson; J Klaber-Moffett; I T Russell
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  1996-10

7.  Randomised controlled trial of exercise for low back pain: clinical outcomes, costs, and preferences.

Authors:  J K Moffett; D Torgerson; S Bell-Syer; D Jackson; H Llewlyn-Phillips; A Farrin; J Barber
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-07-31

8.  Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review.

Authors:  Z Di Blasi; E Harkness; E Ernst; A Georgiou; J Kleijnen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-03-10       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Are randomized controlled trials controlled? Patient preferences and unblind trials.

Authors:  K McPherson; A R Britton; J E Wennberg
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 5.344

10.  Effects of a combination of beta carotene and vitamin A on lung cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  G S Omenn; G E Goodman; M D Thornquist; J Balmes; M R Cullen; A Glass; J P Keogh; F L Meyskens; B Valanis; J H Williams; S Barnhart; S Hammar
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-05-02       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  6 in total

1.  The problem with cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines.

Authors:  Jay N Cohn; Daniel A Duprez
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2012-12

2.  Reasons underpinning patients' preferences for various angina treatments.

Authors:  Nigel Lambert; Gene Rowe; Ann Bowling; Shah Ebrahim; Michael Laurence; Jamie Dalrymple; Richard Thomson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Patient expectations as predictors of outcome in patients with acute low back pain.

Authors:  Samuel S Myers; Russell S Phillips; Roger B Davis; Daniel C Cherkin; Anna Legedza; Ted J Kaptchuk; Andrea Hrbek; Julie E Buring; Diana Post; Maureen T Connelly; David M Eisenberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-12-08       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  No clear influence of preference bias on satisfaction and early functional outcome in resurfacing hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Pepijn Bisseling; José M H Smolders; Annemiek Hol; Job L C van Susante
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 5.  Reporting methods of blinding in randomized trials assessing nonpharmacological treatments.

Authors:  Isabelle Boutron; Lydia Guittet; Candice Estellat; David Moher; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 11.069

6.  Perspectives and experiences of people who were randomly assigned to wait-and-see approach in a gluteal tendinopathy trial: a qualitative follow-up study.

Authors:  Melanie Louise Plinsinga; Rebecca Mellor; Jenny Setchell; Kelsie Ford; Leonard Lynch; Joshua Melrose; Clare Polansky; Bill Vicenzino
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.