Literature DB >> 1881274

Benign and malignant breast disease: the relationship between women's health status and health values.

H A Llewellyn-Thomas1, H J Sutherland, D L Tritchler, G A Lockwood, J E Till, A Ciampi, J F Scott, L A Lickley, E B Fish.   

Abstract

The study purpose was to determine whether differences in the weights assigned to various dimensions of health by 90 women in three subgroups (benign breast disease, breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, and breast cancer receiving other therapies) were associated with differences in self-reported health status in these dimensions. Two methods, one direct and the other indirect, were used to elicit values for mobility, depression, and social support. Two different scales also provided self-reports of health status in each of these dimensions. These measures, in conjunction with sociodemographic variables, were used to test for status-value relationships. No statistically significant association between health values and health status was observed. The absence of any detectable association may have been a result of methodologic difficulties in assessing broadly defined dimensions of health. A possible solution would be to use "individualized" dimensions that are uniquely important to the individual, and to take into account such factors as possible influences of past health status and values, and possible gaps between expected health status and health status actually experienced.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1881274     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9101100307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  11 in total

1.  Studying patients' preferences in health care decision making. Health Services Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-09-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Subjectivity in decision making: common problems and limitations.

Authors:  M M Ravitch
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1989 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Health values of patients coinfected with HIV/hepatitis C: are two viruses worse than one?

Authors:  Joseph M Mrus; Kenneth E Sherman; Anthony C Leonard; Susan N Sherman; Karen L Mandell; Joel Tsevat
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  The effect of age, race and gender on preference scores for hypothetical health states.

Authors:  Eve Wittenberg; Elkan Halpern; Nomia Divi; Lisa A Prosser; Sally S Araki; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  D A Revicki; R M Kaplan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Health values of patients with bipolar disorder.

Authors:  J Tsevat; P E Keck; R W Hornung; S L McElroy
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Decision support for patient preference-based care planning: effects on nursing care and patient outcomes.

Authors:  C M Ruland
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 8.  Methods and problems in measuring quality of life.

Authors:  D F Cella
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Improving patient outcomes by including patient preferences in nursing care.

Authors:  C M Ruland
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1998

Review 10.  Outcomes and quality of life following breast cancer treatment in older women: when, why, how much, and what do women want?

Authors:  Jeanne Mandelblatt; Melissa Figueiredo; Jennifer Cullen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2003-09-17       Impact factor: 3.186

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.