The impact of patient preference on the design and interpretation of clinical trials

Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 70-74

  Feine, Jocelyne S ^a,b   Awad, Manal A ^a   Lund, James P ^a,c  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Outcome measures; Patient satisfaction; Preference; Study design

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DENTAL RESEARCH; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SELF EVALUATION;

DENTAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 0031993020     PISSN: 03015661     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1998.tb02086.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Deber RB. Physicians in health care management: 7. The patient-physician partnership: changing roles and the desire for information. Can Med Assoc J 1994:171-6.
2. Stephens RJ, Hopwood P, Girling DJ, Machin D. Randomized trials with quality of life endpoints: are doctors' ratings of patients' physical symptoms interchangeable with patients' self-ratings? Qual Life Res 1997;6:225-36.
3. de Grandmont P, Feine JS, Boudrias P, Taché R, Donohue WB, Tanguay R, et al. Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: psychometric evaluation. J Dent Res 1994;73:1096-104.
4. Feine JS, de Grandmont P, Boudrias P, Tachè R, Lamarche C, Lund JP. Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: choice of prosthesis. J Dent Res 1994;73:1105-11.
5. Tang L, Lund JP, Taché R, Clokie CML, Feine JS. A within-subject comparison of mandibular long-bar and hybrid implant-supported prostheses: psychometric evaluation and patient preference. J Dent Res 1997:76:1675-83.
6. Orth-Gomer K, Britton M, Rehnqvist N. Quality of care in an outpatient department: the patient's view. Soc Sci Med 1979:13A(3):347-50.
7. Thomas MR, Lyttle D. Patient expectations about success of treatment and reported pain relief from low back pain. J Psychosom Res 1980;24(6):297-301.
8. Hall R, Horrocks JC, Clamp SE, De Dombal FT. Observer variation in assessment of results of surgery for peptic ulceration. Br Med J 1976;1(6013):814-6.
9. Prusoff BA, Klerman GL, Paykel ES. Concordance between clinical assessments and patients' self-report in depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1972;26(6):546-52.
10. Jachuck SJ, Brierley H, Jachuck S, Willcox PM. The effect of hypotensive drugs on the quality of life. J R Coll Gen Pract 1982;32(235):103-5.
11. Callaghan JJ, Dysart SH, Savory CF, Hopkinson WJ. Assessing the results of hip replacement: a comparison of 5 different rating systems. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1990;72:1008-9.
12. Sprangers MAG, Aaronson NK. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:743-60.
13. Grossman SA, Sheidler VR, Swedeen K, Mucenski J, Piantadosi S. Correlation of patient and care giver ratings of cancer pain. J Pain Symp Manage 1991;6:53-7.
14. Balkhi KM, Tallents RH. Error analysis of a magnetic jaw-tracking device. J Craniomandib Disord Fac Oral Pain 1991;5:51-6.
15. Tsolka P, Woelfel JB, Man WK, Preiskel HW. A laboratory assessment of recording reliability and analysis of the K6 diagnostic system. J Craniomandib Disord Fac Oral Pain 1992:6:273-80.
16. Lund JP, Widmer CG, Feine JS. Validity of diagnostic and monitoring tests used for temporomandibular disorders. J Dent Res 1995;74:1133-43.
17. Mohl ND, Lund JP, Widmer CG, McCall WD. Devices for the diagnosis and treatment of temporomandibular disorders. Part II: electromyography and sonography. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:332-6.
18. Carlsson GE, Lindquist LW. Ten-year longitudinal study of masticatory function in edentulous patients treated with fixed complete dentures on osseointegrated implants. Int J Prosthodontics 1994;7(5):448-53.
19. Awad MA, Lund JP, Clokie CML, Dufresne E, Feine JS. Factors that affect patients' general satisfaction with mandibular prostheses. J Dent Res 1997;76 (Spec Iss):2103.
20. Zelen M. A new design for randomized clinical trials. New Engl J Med 1979;300(22):1242-5.
21. Morris J, Royle GT. Offering patients a choice of surgery for early breast cancer: a reduction in anxiety and depression in patients and their husbands. Soc Sci Med 1988;26(6):583-5.
22. Silverman WA, Altman DG. Patients' preferences and randomized trials. Lancet 1996;347(8995):171-1.
23. Bradley C. Designing medical and educational intervention studies. A review of some alternatives to conventional randomized controlled trials [review]. Diabetes Care 1993;16(2):509-18.
24. Henshaw RC, Naji SA, Russel T, Tempeton AA. Comparison of medical abortion with surgical vacuum aspiration: women's preferences and acceptability of treatments. Br Med J 1993:307:714-7.
25. Silverman WA. Patients' preferences and randomized trials. Lancet 1994; 343(8913):1586.
26. Awad MA, Shapiro S, Lund JP, Feine JS. Determinants of patients' treatment preferences. J Clin Epidemiolog. Submitted.
27. Brewin CR, Bradley C. Patient preferences and randomized clinical trials. Br Med J 1989;299(6694):313-5.
28. Wennberg JE, Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, Mulley A. Outcomes research, PORTs, and health care review reform. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993;703:52-62.