Literature DB >> 11725929

Design and analysis of trials with quality of life as an outcome: a practical guide.

S J Walters1, M J Campbell, R Lall.   

Abstract

Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) measures are becoming more frequently used in clinical trials, as both primary and secondary endpoints. Investigators are now asking statisticians for advice on how to plan (e.g., sample size) and analyze studies using HRQoL measures. HRQoL measures such as the SF-36 are usually measured on an ordered categorical (ordinal) scale. In the designing stages and when analyzing, the scales are often scored and the scores treated as if they were continuous and normally distributed. However the ordinal scaling of HRQoL measures leads to problems in determining sample size, and conventional parametric methods of estimation and hypothesis testing may not be appropriate for such outcomes. We present practical guidelines for the design and analysis of trials with HRQoL measures as outcomes. We used conventional statistical methods (i.e., t-tests and multiple regression), various ordinal regression models (proportional odds, continuation ratio, polytomous and stereotype) and bootstrap methods to analyze an HRQoL dataset. To illustrate the various methods we used HRQoL data on the SF-36 Role Limitations Emotional dimension for two groups of patients with leg ulcers. The bootstrap, t-test, and multiple regression methods gave similar results. The various ordinal regression models also gave similar results. If the HRQoL measure has a large number of ordered categories, most of which are occupied, and the underlying scale really is continuous but measured imperfectly by an instrument with a limited number of discrete values, then an informal rule of thumb is that this discrete scale should be treated as continuous if it has seven or more categories and as ordinal otherwise.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11725929     DOI: 10.1081/BIP-100107655

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biopharm Stat        ISSN: 1054-3406            Impact factor:   1.051


  17 in total

Review 1.  A blueprint for symptom scales and responses: measurement and reporting.

Authors:  K W Wyrwich; V M Staebler Tardino
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Clinical and genetic correlates of severity in schizophrenia in India: an ordinal logistic regression approach.

Authors:  Pramod Thomas; Abha Chandra; Triptish Bhatia; N N Mishra; Vikash Ranjan Sharma; Deepak Gauba; Joel Wood; Kodavali Chowdari; Prachi Semwal; B K Thelma; Vishwajit L Nimgaonkar; Smita N Deshpande
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2011-05-28       Impact factor: 3.222

3.  The progression of disability among older adults in Mexico.

Authors:  Carlos Díaz-Venegas; Timothy A Reistetter; Ching-Yi Wang; Rebeca Wong
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 3.033

4.  Effect Size Estimates for the ESCAPE Trial: Proportional Odds Regression Versus Other Statistical Methods.

Authors:  Tolulope T Sajobi; Yukun Zhang; Bijoy K Menon; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Joseph P Broderick; Michael D Hill
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 7.914

5.  A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

Authors:  Thomas A Murray; Ying Yuan; Peter F Thall; Joan H Elizondo; Wayne L Hofstetter
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Difference in reported pre-morbid health-related quality of life between ARDS survivors and their substitute decision makers.

Authors:  Damon C Scales; Catherine M Tansey; Andrea Matte; Margaret S Herridge
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Health-related quality of life among self-reported arthritis sufferers: effects of race/ethnicity and residence.

Authors:  Stacey H Kovac; Ted R Mikuls; Amy Mudano; Kenneth G Saag
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Baseline quality of life before intensive care: a comparison of patient versus proxy responses.

Authors:  Jeneen M Gifford; Nadia Husain; Victor D Dinglas; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Dale M Needham
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 7.598

9.  A New Procedure to Assess When Estimates from the Cumulative Link Model Can Be Interpreted as Differences for Ordinal Scales in Quality of Life Studies.

Authors:  Yilin Ning; Peh Joo Ho; Nathalie C Støer; Ka Keat Lim; Hwee-Lin Wee; Mikael Hartman; Marie Reilly; Chuen Seng Tan
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.790

10.  Inter-rater reliability of the Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) in the assessment of the paediatric foot.

Authors:  Stewart C Morrison; Jill Ferrari
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 2.303

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.