Literature DB >> 8142945

Quality of life assessments in the evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging.

R Mackenzie1, W Hollingworth, A K Dixon.   

Abstract

Health technology assessments incorporating measurement of quality of life are becoming increasingly common. In the evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the most widely used quality of life instrument has been the Rosser classification. The theoretical basis for incorporating such a measure in the evaluation of imaging technology is considered and several studies using this instrument are reviewed. Despite the obvious technical advances of MRI and its influence on clinical management, it has proved difficult to demonstrate that the use of this expensive new imaging technique contributes to improvement in health-related quality of life. Some reasons why the expected improvement has not been demonstrated are discussed, as are the quality of life instruments which may be appropriate in this setting.

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8142945     DOI: 10.1007/bf00647846

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  23 in total

1.  Quality of life measures in health care. I: Applications and issues in assessment.

Authors:  R Fitzpatrick; A Fletcher; S Gore; D Jones; D Spiegelhalter; D Cox
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-10-31

2.  An audit of the clinical use of magnetic resonance imaging of the head and spine.

Authors:  P Southern; A Teale; A Dixon; C Freer; C Sims; D Rubenstein; I Wilkinson; L Hall; A Williams
Journal:  Health Trends       Date:  1991

3.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Economics of coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  A Williams
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1985-08-03

5.  The measurement of hospital output.

Authors:  R M Rosser; V C Watts
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1972       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 6.  Evaluating and comparing imaging techniques: a review and classification of study designs.

Authors:  L S Freedman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging for axillary symptoms following treatment of breast carcinoma? A randomized trial.

Authors:  A K Dixon; T K Wheeler; D J Lomas; R Mackenzie
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 2.350

8.  Who needs high technology?

Authors:  I K Fry
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in suspected lesions in the posterior cranial fossa.

Authors:  G M Teasdale; D M Hadley; A Lawrence; I Bone; H Burton; R Grant; B Condon; P Macpherson; J Rowan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-08-05

10.  Computerized cranial tomography. Effect on diagnostic and therapeutic plans.

Authors:  H V Fineberg; R Bauman; M Sosman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1977-07-18       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  3 in total

1.  The clinical impact of high resolution computed tomography in patients with respiratory disease.

Authors:  Nicholas J Screaton; Fiona N A C Miller; Bipen D Patel; Ashley Groves; Angela D Tasker; David A Lomas; Christopher D R Flower
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-08-24       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Measuring changes in quality of life following magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: SF-36, EuroQol or Rosser index?

Authors:  W Hollingworth; R Mackenzie; C J Todd; A K Dixon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Asymptomatic pancreatic cystic neoplasms: maximizing survival and quality of life using Markov-based clinical nomograms.

Authors:  Benjamin M Weinberg; Brennan M R Spiegel; James S Tomlinson; James J Farrell
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 22.682

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.