Literature DB >> 1583941

Benefits and obstacles for development of health status assessment measures in clinical settings.

A R Feinstein1.   

Abstract

Health status measures offer scientific, humanistic, and economic benefits for clinical medicine. The main problem is the many intellectual and pragmatic obstacles that block successful development of these measures. The inventory of such problems includes the following: definition of health; medical components of health status; who makes the choice about what to include and emphasize; attributes to be rated by patients or clinicians; indexes to be created from those attributes (including mega-variable indexes, global indexes, and oligo-category indexes); different measurements of the same entity; and clinimetric problems in nonclinimetric models. Several solutions to these multiple, complex difficulties can be offered: 1) ensure that a specific purpose, focus, and setting are clearly identified for every health status index; 2) recognize that an off-the-shelf index with high statistical scores for so-called reliability and validity may not be pertinent for a given current situation in which it is to be used; 3) avoid indexes involving combinations of excessive numbers of variables; 4) let patients choose the most significant foci and components of the indexes; 5) seek greater communication and understanding among multidisciplinary collaborators, who may have many differences in the ethos and goals with which they approach the construction of health status indexes; and 6) recognize that the construction of suitable health status indexes is an outstanding challenge in basic scientific inquiry, and, in this spirit, support major alterations in the current ideology for conceptualization and funding of what is basic science in clinical medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1583941     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199205001-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  7 in total

1.  Oncologists' use of quality of life information: results of a survey of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group physicians.

Authors:  A Bezjak; P Ng; R Skeel; A D Depetrillo; R Comis; K M Taylor
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Measuring quality of life: Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting.

Authors:  I J Higginson; A J Carr
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-05-26

3.  Quality of life assessment: values and pitfalls.

Authors:  T M Gill
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 18.000

4.  A new patient focused index for measuring quality of life in persons with severe and persistent mental illness.

Authors:  M Becker; R Diamond; F Sainfort
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Psychometric characteristics of health-related quality-of-life questionnaires in oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Authors:  Angelique A Timmerman; Renée Speyer; Bas J Heijnen; Iris R Klijn-Zwijnenberg
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 3.438

Review 6.  Checklist to operationalize measurement characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  David O Francis; Melissa L McPheeters; Meaghan Noud; David F Penson; Irene D Feurer
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2016-08-02

7.  The Medical Nemesis of Primary Health Care Implementation: Evidence From Ghana.

Authors:  Nana Nimo Appiah-Agyekum; Emmanuel Kojo Sakyi; Esinam Afi Kayi; Desmond Dzidzornu Otoo; Josephine Appiah-Agyekum
Journal:  Health Serv Insights       Date:  2022-07-22
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.