Some considerations for the interpretation of health-related quality of life data [1]

Value in Health

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 80-81

  Norquist, Josephine M ^a   Girman, Cindy J ^a   Santanello, Nancy C ^a  

^a MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LETTER; LIFE EVENT; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 14344256304     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.08104.x     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Marquis P, Chassany O, Abetz L. A comprehensive strategy for the interpretation of quality of life data based on existing methods. Value Health 2004; 7:93-104.
2. Lydick E, Epstein RS. Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res 1993;2:221-6.
3. Guyatt GH, Norman GR, Juniper EF, Griffith LE. A critical look at transition ratings. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:900-8.
4. Testa M, Anderson RB, Nackley JF, Hollenberg NK for the Quality-of-Life Hypertension Study Group. Quality of life and antihypertensive therapy in men - a comparison of captopril with enalapril. N Engl J Med 1993;328:907-13.
5. Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful differences in health-related quality of life research. Pharmacoeconomics 2000;18:419-23.
6. Santanello NC, Zhang J, Seidenberg B, et al. What are minimal important changes for asthma measures in a clinical trial? Eur Respir J 1999; 14:23-7.