Literature DB >> 9737137

Testing for differences in multiple quality of life dimensions: generating hypotheses from the experience of hospital staff.

M Groenvold1, P M Fayers.   

Abstract

In clinical trials with a quality of life (QoL) component, it is usual to monitor several QoL dimensions at several points in time. Multiple significance tests without formal hypotheses are problematic. It is not always feasible to specify a priori hypotheses for all variables. Can such studies be used to generate hypotheses for testing in later research only? We developed a method which can allow for formal hypothesis testing on a data set collected without a priori hypotheses in the protocol. We surveyed experienced physicians and nurses treating patients, to obtain independent expectations about differences in QoL dimensions. These 'staff expectations' will be used in the analysis of QoL data collected from breast cancer patients taking part in three randomized trials of adjuvant therapy. We propose frameworks for the informal and formal use of the experience of the staff in testing for group differences in patients' QoL scores. The method described here is anticipated to be useful for QoL studies in general, even when a priori hypotheses were specified before the studies were initiated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9737137     DOI: 10.1023/a:1008818206511

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


  13 in total

1.  False-positive results in clinical trials: multiple significance tests and the problem of unreported comparisons.

Authors:  I F Tannock
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1996-02-21       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Data trawling: to fish or not to fish.

Authors:  K B Michels; B A Rosner
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-10-26       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  The statistical basis of public policy: a paradigm shift is overdue.

Authors:  R J Lilford; D Braunholtz
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-07

Review 4.  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

5.  Validation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire through combined qualitative and quantitative assessment of patient-observer agreement.

Authors:  M Groenvold; M C Klee; M A Sprangers; N K Aaronson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Test for item bias in a quality of life questionnaire.

Authors:  M Groenvold; J B Bjorner; M C Klee; S Kreiner
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Tutorial in biostatistics Bayesian data monitoring in clinical trials.

Authors:  P M Fayers; D Ashby; M K Parmar
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1997-06-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 8.  The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review.

Authors:  M A Sprangers; N K Aaronson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  The hospital anxiety and depression scale.

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

10.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  1 in total

1.  Quantitative assessment of changes in patients' constructs of quality of life: an application of multilevel models.

Authors:  Adam Lowy; Jürg Bernhard
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.147

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.