Literature DB >> 9161110

Sample sizes for randomized trials measuring quality of life in cancer patients.

S A Julious1, S George, D Machin, R J Stephens.   

Abstract

This paper describes the methods appropriate for calculating sample sizes for clinical trials assessing quality of life (QOL). An example from a randomized trial of patients with small cell lung cancer completing the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is used for illustration. Sample size estimates calculated assuming that the data are either of the Normal form or binary are compared to estimates derived using an ordered categorical approach. In our example, since the data are very skewed, the Normal and binary approaches are shown to be unsatisfactory: binary methods may lead to substantial over estimates of sample size and Normal methods take no account of the asymmetric nature of the distribution. When summarizing normative data for QOL scores the frequency distributions should always be given so that one can assess if non-parametric methods should be used for sample size calculations and analysis. Further work is needed to discover what changes in QOL scores represent clinical importance for health technology interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9161110     DOI: 10.1023/a:1026481815304

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


  19 in total

1.  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Authors:  D G Altman; J M Bland
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-08-19

2.  The log transformation is special.

Authors:  O N Keene
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1995-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 3.  Guidelines for reporting results of quality of life assessments in clinical trials.

Authors:  M Staquet; R Berzon; D Osoba; D Machin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  Statistics notes. Logarithms.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-03-16

5.  Short form 36 (SF36) health survey questionnaire: normative data for adults of working age.

Authors:  C Jenkinson; A Coulter; L Wright
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-05-29

6.  The CHART trials: Bayesian design and monitoring in practice. CHART Steering Committee.

Authors:  M K Parmar; D J Spiegelhalter; L S Freedman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1994 Jul 15-30       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  The hospital anxiety and depression scale.

Authors:  A S Zigmond; R P Snaith
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 6.392

Review 8.  Sample size: how many patients are necessary?

Authors:  P M Fayers; D Machin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  A randomised trial of three or six courses of etoposide cyclophosphamide methotrexate and vincristine or six courses of etoposide and ifosfamide in small cell lung cancer (SCLC). II: Quality of life. Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party.

Authors:  N M Bleehen; D J Girling; D Machin; R J Stephens
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Randomised trial of four-drug vs less intensive two-drug chemotherapy in the palliative treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and poor prognosis. Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  4 in total

1.  Application of robust statistical methods for sensitivity analysis of health-related quality of life outcomes.

Authors:  Jennifer L Beaumont; Lisa M Lix; Kathleen J Yost; Elizabeth A Hahn
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Sample sizes for cancer trials where Health Related Quality of Life is the primary outcome.

Authors:  S A Julious; M J Campbell; S J Walker; S L George; D Machin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.640

3.  The use of continuous data versus binary data in MTC models: a case study in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Susanne Schmitz; Roisin Adams; Cathal Walsh
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Sample size and power estimation for studies with health related quality of life outcomes: a comparison of four methods using the SF-36.

Authors:  Stephen J Walters
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-05-25       Impact factor: 3.186

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.