Literature DB >> 7536868

Comparing prospective and retrospective measures of treatment outcomes.

R H Aseltine1, K J Carlson, F J Fowler, M J Barry.   

Abstract

This study examines the correspondence between retrospective and prospective assessments of treatment outcomes among female patients treated for gynecologic symptoms (n = 800) and male patients having surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia (n = 434). The overall health and symptom status of patients in both samples was assessed at enrollment and again 3 months after treatment; at the 3-month follow-up, patients also were asked to compare retrospectively their current health and how they were feeling with their condition before treatment. Findings indicate that prospective and retrospective measures of change do not yield the same results. Retrospective assessments consistently produce higher estimates of the benefits of treatment, although that pattern was clearer for overall health status than for measures of symptoms. Patients' posttreatment health and symptom status contributes as much to retrospective assessments of change as does prospectively measured change, although the retrospective assessments of female patients whose gynecologic symptoms were medically managed were more strongly related to prospective change than those of hysterectomy patients or prostate surgery patients. Overall, we conclude that these alternative measurement strategies yield divergent assessments of change, depending on the type of treatment a patient receives and, to some extent, what is being measured.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7536868

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


  12 in total

1.  Assessing change in chronic pain severity: the chronic pain grade compared with retrospective perceptions.

Authors:  Alison M Elliott; Blair H Smith; Philip C Hannaford; W Cairns Smith; W Alastair Chambers
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Prospective versus retrospective measurement of change in health status: a community based study in Geneva, Switzerland.

Authors:  T V Perneger; J F Etter; A Rougemont
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  The impact of implementing selected CBPR strategies to address disparities in urban Atlanta: a retrospective case study.

Authors:  Marshall W Kreuter; Michelle C Kegler; Karen T Joseph; Yanique A Redwood; Margaret Hooker
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2012-06-19

4.  Retrospective information on health status and its application for population health measures.

Authors:  Michael T Molla; James Lubitz
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2008-02

5.  A comparison of the results of prospective and retrospective cohort studies in the field of digestive surgery.

Authors:  Tomohiko Ukai; Satoru Shikata; Takeo Nakayama; Yousuke C Takemura
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Are patients' ratings of their physicians related to health outcomes?

Authors:  Peter Franks; Kevin Fiscella; Cleveland G Shields; Sean C Meldrum; Paul Duberstein; Anthony F Jerant; Daniel J Tancredi; Ronald M Epstein
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Amoxicillin for acute rhinosinusitis: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jane M Garbutt; Christina Banister; Edward Spitznagel; Jay F Piccirillo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  What is an acceptable outcome of treatment before it begins? Methodological considerations and implications for patients with chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Henrik Hein Lauridsen; Claus Manniche; Lars Korsholm; Niels Grunnet-Nilsson; Jan Hartvigsen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Dealing with ceiling baseline treatment satisfaction level in patients with diabetes under flexible, functional insulin treatment: assessment of improvements in treatment satisfaction with a new insulin analogue.

Authors:  K Howorka; J Pumprla; C Schlusche; D Wagner-Nosiska; A Schabmann; C Bradley
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.440

10.  The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (DTSQc) evaluated in insulin glargine trials shows greater responsiveness to improvements than the original DTSQ.

Authors:  Clare Bradley; Rosalind Plowright; John Stewart; John Valentine; Elke Witthaus
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2007-10-10       Impact factor: 3.186

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.