Symposium on Quality of Life in Cancer PatientsAssessing Clinical Significance in Measuring Oncology Patient Quality of Life: Introduction to the Symposium, Content Overview, and Definition of Terms
Section snippets
WHY DO WE NEED A SERIES OF ARTICLES ON QOL CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE?
There has been an explosion of QOL publications in recent years. However, the literature on QOL research is scattered and not easily accessible. Much of what we now call QOL literature is spread out in the nursing, social science (eg, psychology), and medical literature. Gaps exist between the research literature and clinicians themselves in terms of language and communication. Regulatory agencies are searching for guidelines to handle QOL data. To date there have not been unified guidelines
HOW DID THIS EFFORT COME TOGETHER?
Investigators, regulators, and clinicians have accepted QOL as an end point in clinical research.2, 4 A mechanism for easy incorporation in clinical practice or trials is still pending. Clinicians may become frustrated with an inability to understand how to integrate these “soft” measures into clinical research and practice. If such mechanisms are not clarified with a strong and unified voice from the QOL research community, there is a danger that QOL will be marginalized in such endeavors.
WHO IS THE INTENDED AUDIENCE?
This series of articles is aimed at oncology clinical researchers and clinicians. The target audience includes those who are familiar with QOL research and those who have seen QOL assessment as a barrier to clinical research. The audience includes clinicians who may want to incorporate QOL assessment into their clinical practice but do not know how or who are concerned that doing so may involve an inordinate burden for them, their practice, and their patients. While the series is intended to be
HOW DID THE WRITING PROCESS PROCEED?
Each team included a clinician, an experienced QOL researcher, and a methodologist. The remainder of the team members were chosen to achieve a balance of interests and experience. Teams were given the topic they were to address, and the group leader was asked to initiate communication via e-mail, telephone, and/or teleconference prior to the formal 2000 conference. This optimized efficiency for the writing tasks during the time of the meeting. At the consensus meeting, each topic was given a
REFERENCES (15)
- et al.
Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures
Mayo Clin Proc
(2002) - et al.
Group vs individual approaches to understanding the clinical significance of differences or changes in quality of life
Mayo Clin Proc
(2002) - et al.
On the detection of outlier clinics in medical and surgical trials, I: practical considerations
Control Clin Trials
(1981) - et al.
A critical appraisal of the quality-of-life measurements
JAMA
(1994) Treating the patient, not just the cancer [editorial]
N Engl J Med
(1987)- et al.
Quality-of-life assessment: can we keep it simple?
J R Stat Soc
(1992) Outcomes of cancer treatment for technology assessment and cancer treatment guidelines
J Clin Oncol
(1996)
Cited by (141)
Toward a Fully Fledged Integration of Spiritual Care and Medical Care
2018, Journal of Pain and Symptom ManagementRelationship Between Spirituality, Meaning in Life, Psychological Distress, Wish for Hastened Death, and Their Influence on Quality of Life in Palliative Care Patients
2017, Journal of Pain and Symptom ManagementMitral Valve Prolapse, Psychoemotional Status, and Quality of Life: Prospective Investigation in the Current Era
2016, American Journal of MedicineCitation Excerpt :This questionnaire has been validated previously with cardiac patients.26,27 Health-related quality of life was measured by the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey28 and by the single-item Linear Analogue Self-Assessment.29 The Short-Form Health Survey assessed physical and mental health-related quality of life using summary scores (Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary).
Psychoemotional and quality of life response to mitral operations in patients with mitral regurgitation: A prospective study
2015, Annals of Thoracic SurgeryCitation Excerpt :The single-item linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scales were adapted to assess a clinically relevant global view of well-being, ranging from 0 to 100 with written descriptors anchoring extremes. Scores on LASA scales are reliable and simple to interpret in patients with chronic diseases, including heart disease [9, 15]. Continuous baseline measurements were presented as means ± SD and compared between the groups using analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Tukey-Kramer’s tests.
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neurotoxicity: Defining Minimal and Clinically Important Changes
2023, JNCCN Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
A complete list of other Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group contributors to this article appears at the end of the article.
This project was supported in part by Public Health Service grants CA25224, CA37404, CA15083, CA35269, CA35113, CA35272, CA52352, CA35103, CA37417, CA63849, CA35448, CA35101, CA35195, CA35415, and CA35103.
Individual reprints of this article are not available. The entire Symposium on the Clinical Significance of Quality-of-Life Measures in Cancer Patients will be available for purchase as a bound booklet from the Proceedings Editorial Office at a later date