Literature DB >> 6488807

Measuring functional outcomes in therapeutic trials for chronic disease.

R A Deyo.   

Abstract

For clinical trials of many chronic diseases, the outcome of greatest interest may be patient function. Unfortunately, most scales for measuring functional status are crude and rarely consider important psychosocial impacts of disease. This paper briefly considers the pressures for improving functional status measurement, proposes six criteria for assessing functional or "health status" scales, and selectively reviews representative instruments using these criteria. Older functional classifications and many scales used for quality-of-care assessment are narrowly focussed on physical function. Their reliability, validity, and sensitivity to clinical changes are generally unknown. Traditional scales of "Activities of Daily Living" are similarly focussed on physical function, and are most appropriate for severely disabled inpatients. A new generation of "health status" instruments offers wider applicability, more comprehensiveness, and feasibility for clinical applications. Their validity and reliability are generally quite good. None of the instruments reviewed, however, has yet demonstrated convincing success as a "transition" variable (sensitivity to small but clinically important changes). Based on this analysis, future investigation should seek to (1) define the optimal balance between brevity on the one hand, and comprehensiveness and reliability on the other, (2) describe the sensitivity of scales to clinically important changes, and (3) directly compare existing instruments to aid selection by investigators who are considering their use in clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6488807     DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(84)90026-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Control Clin Trials        ISSN: 0197-2456


  12 in total

1.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Measuring quality of life in clinical trials: a taxonomy and review.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; S J Veldhuyzen Van Zanten; D H Feeny; D L Patrick
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1989-06-15       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  The feasibility, reliability and validity of the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cardiff Short Form (MQOL-CSF) in palliative care population.

Authors:  Pei Lin Lua; Sam Salek; Ilora Finlay; Chris Lloyd-Richards
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  On the generalizability of statistical expressions of health related quality of life instrument responsiveness: a data synthesis.

Authors:  M M Murawski; P A Miederhoff
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Health-related quality of life assessment and the pharmaceutical industry.

Authors:  D A Revicki; M Rothman; B Luce
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 2.980

7.  The Veterans Administration Northwest Regional Health Services Research and Development Field Program: organization, activities, and early outcomes.

Authors:  C D Austin; W B Carter; M L Durham; S C Hedrick; D H Hickam; T S Inui; T D Koepsell; R A Pearlman; M D Petersen; M L Rothman
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1986-02       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; C Bombardier; P X Tugwell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1986-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Measuring functional health status in primary care using the COOP-WONCA charts: acceptability, range of scores, construct validity, reliability and sensitivity to change.

Authors:  P Kinnersley; T Peters; N Stott
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  Is upper gastrointestinal radiography necessary in the initial management of uncomplicated dyspepsia? A randomized controlled trial comparing empiric antacid therapy plus patient reassurance with traditional care.

Authors:  J D Goodson; J W Lehmann; J M Richter; J L Read; S Atamian; G A Colditz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.