Literature DB >> 19715452

Does nonparticipation in studies of advanced cancer lead to biased quality-of-life scores?

Morten A Petersen1, Lise Pedersen, Mogens Groenvold.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: Missing data are a common problem in palliative care research. Often the most impaired patients are unable to participate in studies. This may result in biased findings. We investigated whether observed patient reported outcomes should be adjusted for bias resulting from nonparticipation.
METHODS: Of 791 patients with cancer admitted to palliative care, 304 (38%) participated by answering the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire. For the 15 symptoms and problems measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 mean scores based on observed responses only were compared to two methods including imputed (estimated) scores based on patient characteristics for the missing data.
RESULTS: All mean differences between scores based on observed responses only and the two methods including imputed scores for the missing data were less than 5 on a 0-100 scale. For 4 of the 30 comparisons a significant underestimation of symptomatology was found when using observed responses only.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find indications that using observed responses only resulted in clinically important underestimation of palliative care patients' symptomatology. Either nonparticipants' scores did not differ significantly from participants' or the variables used to describe the non-participants were insufficient predictors of the patients' scores. In any case, the study indicated that imputation of scores of nonparticipants in palliative care may not be worthwhile unless very good predictors are available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19715452     DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2009.0108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Palliat Med        ISSN: 1557-7740            Impact factor:   2.947


  4 in total

1.  Poor Accrual in Palliative Research Studies: An Update From the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program.

Authors:  Karen Lien; Liang Zeng; Nicole Bradley; Shaelyn Culleton; Marko Popovic; Julia Di Giovanni; Rehana Jamani; Gemma Cramarossa; Janet Nguyen; Kaitlin Koo; Florencia Jon; Edward Chow
Journal:  World J Oncol       Date:  2011-10-28

2.  Should analyses of large, national palliative care data sets with patient reported outcomes (PROs) be restricted to services with high patient participation? A register-based study.

Authors:  Maiken Bang Hansen; Morten Aagaard Petersen; Lone Ross; Mogens Groenvold
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 3.234

3.  Reporting of "quality of life": a systematic review and quantitative analysis of research publications in palliative care journals.

Authors:  Senthil P Kumar
Journal:  Indian J Palliat Care       Date:  2012-01

4.  Preliminary development and validation of a new end-of-life patient-reported outcome measure assessing the ability of patients to finalise their affairs at the end of life.

Authors:  Nikki McCaffrey; Pawel Skuza; Katrina Breaden; Simon Eckermann; Janet Hardy; Sheila Oaten; Michael Briffa; David Currow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.