Testa M A, Nackley J F
Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.
Annu Rev Public Health. 1994;15:535-59. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pu.15.050194.002535.
Methodologies involving the use of quality-of-life patient outcomes in observational and interventional studies of health are drawn from a large and diverse field of research methods. The multidimensional way in which quality of life is conceptualized will affect the way it is measured and the complexity of the measurement. At the earliest stages of research, one must rely on methods common to the fields of tests and measurement, survey research, psychometrics and sociometrics to measure constructs that are not directly observable. Indices measuring performance can either focus on the scale's ability to perform in noninterventional, cross-sectional studies or interventional, longitudinal studies. Indices of stability, internal consistency, responsiveness with respect to true changes in quality of life, and sensitivity to treatment effects can be used to assess the scale's adequacy as a dependent variable of interest. Respondent variability can occur due to factors such as different reporters (patient, spouse, physician), the manner and form of administration (long form vs short form; self-administration vs interview) and the assessment environment (clinic, home). Finally, since quality-of-life research often involves inferential statistics and hypothesis testing, the statistical and epidemiologic principles of good study design should be followed. In addition, one should account for the reliability, responsiveness, and the sensitivity of the scale when designing the scientific hypotheses, and should specifically address the meaning of quality-of-life effect sizes by interventional-based validation. Design considerations must address the statistical issues of power, the determination of effect sizes through validation by external criteria, longitudinal data, effects of withdrawal and early termination, ceiling and floor effects, and heterogeneity of responsiveness and sensitivity among individuals. The problem of estimating quality-of-life summary parameters for use in pharmacoeconomic models is receiving increasing attention in this era of health-care reform and fiscal restraint. While medical decision theory has used cost-effectiveness models and quality-adjusted life years since the early 1970s, estimation of population parameters to differentiate among different medical interventions is relatively new. The assessment of the patient outcomes associated with medical interventions in terms of the risks, benefits and costs will clearly be a major focus of health-care reform. Development of new methodologies in quality-of-life research should build upon the strong foundation already established in the areas of clinical research, epidemiology, biostatistics, economics and behavioral science.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
在健康领域的观察性研究和干预性研究中,涉及使用患者生活质量结果的方法源自广泛多样的研究方法领域。生活质量的多维概念化方式将影响其测量方式以及测量的复杂性。在研究的最初阶段,必须依靠测试与测量、调查研究、心理测量学和社会测量学领域常用的方法来测量那些无法直接观察到的结构。衡量表现的指标既可以关注量表在非干预性横断面研究或干预性纵向研究中的表现能力。稳定性指标、内部一致性、对生活质量真实变化的反应性以及对治疗效果的敏感性,可用于评估该量表作为感兴趣的因变量的充分性。由于不同报告者(患者、配偶、医生)、施测方式和形式(长式与短式;自我施测与访谈)以及评估环境(诊所、家中)等因素,可能会出现应答者变异性。最后,由于生活质量研究通常涉及推断统计和假设检验,因此应遵循良好研究设计的统计和流行病学原则。此外,在设计科学假设时应考虑量表的可靠性、反应性和敏感性,并应通过基于干预的验证具体说明生活质量效应大小的含义。设计考量必须解决功效的统计问题、通过外部标准验证确定效应大小、纵向数据、撤药和提前终止的影响、天花板和地板效应以及个体间反应性和敏感性的异质性。在这个医疗保健改革和财政紧缩的时代,估计用于药物经济学模型的生活质量汇总参数的问题正受到越来越多的关注。自20世纪70年代初以来,医学决策理论一直使用成本效益模型和质量调整生命年,但估计用于区分不同医疗干预措施的总体参数相对较新。从风险、益处和成本方面评估与医疗干预相关的患者结果,显然将是医疗保健改革的一个主要重点。生活质量研究新方法的开发应建立在临床研究、流行病学、生物统计学、经济学和行为科学等领域已确立的坚实基础之上。(摘要截选至400字)