Assessing psychosocial/quality of life outcomes in screening: How do we do it better?

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 58, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 968-970

  McCaffery, Kirsten J ^a   Barratt, Alexandra L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; HEALTH MONITORING; QUALITY OF LIFE;

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; ANXIETY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; EDITORIAL; EMOTION; MEASUREMENT; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZATION; RISK FACTOR; SCREENING; SELF EVALUATION; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 9444284947     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech.2004.025114     Document Type: Editorial

References (15)

1. Marteau TM, Kim LG, Upton J, et al. Poorer self assessed health in a prospective study of men with screen detected abdominal aortic aneurysm: a predictor or a consequence of screening outcomes? J Epidemiol Community Health 2004;58:1042-6.
2. Barratt A, Irwig L, Glasziou P, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature. XVII. How to use guidelines and recommendations about screening. JAAM 1999;281:2029-34.
3. Black W, Welch H. Advances in diagnostic imaging and over-estimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1237-43.
4. Zahl PH, Strand BH, Maehlen J. Incidence of breast cancer in Norway and Sweden during introduction of nationwide screening: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2004;328:921-4.
5. Wardle FJ, Taylor T, Sutton S, et al. Does publicity about cancer screening raise fear of cancer? Randomised trial of the psychological effect of information about cancer screening. BMJ 1999;319:1037-8.
6. Hornquist JO. The concept of quality of life. Scand J Soc Med 1982;10:57-61.
7. Gill TM, Feinstein AR. A critical appraisal of quality of life measurements. JAMA 1994;272:619-26.
8. Bowling A. Measuring health: a review of quality of life measurement scales. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1997.
9. Hunt SM. The problem of quality of life. Qual Life Res 1997;6:205-12.
10. Smith AE. Quality of life: a review. Education and Ageing 2000;15:419-35.
11. Cockburn J, De Luise T, Hurley S, et al. Development and validation of the PCQ: a questionnaire to measure the psychological consequences of screening mammography. Soc Sci Med 1992;34:1129-34.
12. Wardle J, Pernet A, Stephens D. Psychological consequences of positive results in cervical cancer screening. Psychol Health 1995;10:185-94.
13. Bennett A, Irwig L, Oldenburg B, et al. PEAPS-Q: A questionnaire to measure the psychosocial effects of having an abnormal pap smear. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:1235-43.
14. Brodersen J, Thorsen H, Cockburn J. The adequacy of measurement of short and long-term consequences of false positive screening mammography. J Med Screen 2004;11:39-44.
15. Idler EL, Benyamini Y. Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav 1997;38:21-37.