Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Andrew Garratt a National Centre for Health Outcomes
Development, Unit of Health-Care Epidemiology, Institute of Health
Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, b Department of Public
Health, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3
7LF
Correspondence to: A
Garratt andrew.garratt{at}uhce.ox.ac.uk
Objectives:
To assess the growth of quality of life
measures and to examine the availability of measures across specialties.
What is already known on this topic
There is little standardisation in the use of such measures within
clinical trials What this study adds
The number of reports varies considerably according to the health
problem
Design:
Systematic searches of electronic databases to identify developmental and evaluative work relating to health outcome measures assessed by patients.
Main outcome measures:
Types of measures:
disease or population specific, dimension specific, generic,
individualised, and utility. Specialties in which measures have been
developed and evaluated.
Results:
3921 reports that described the development and evaluation of patient assessed measures met the inclusion criteria.
Of those that were classifiable, 1819 (46%) were disease or population
specific, 865 (22%) were generic, 690 (18%) were dimension specific,
409 (10%) were utility, and 62 (1%) were individualised measures.
During 1990-9 the number of new reports of development and evaluation
rose from 144 to 650 per year. Reports of disease specific measures
rose exponentially. Over 30% of evaluations were in cancer,
rheumatology and musculoskeletal disorders, and older people's health.
The generic measures
SF-36, sickness impact profile, and Nottingham
health profile
accounted for 612 (16%) reports.
Conclusions:
In some specialties there are numerous
measures of quality of life and little standardisation. Primary
research through the concurrent evaluation of measures and secondary
research through structured reviews of measures are prerequisites for
standardisation. Recommendations for the selection of patient assessed
measures of health outcome are needed.
Quality of life measures are increasingly used for measuring health
outcomes in evaluative research
There has been exponential growth in reports relating to the
development and evaluation of quality of life measures
Read all Rapid Responses
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.