Skip to main content
Log in

Testing for differences in multiple quality of life dimensions: generating hypotheses from the experience of hospital staff

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In clinical trials with a quality of life (QoL) component, it is usual to monitor several QoL dimensions at several points in time. Multiple significance tests without formal hypotheses are problematic. It is not always feasible to specify a priori hypotheses for all variables. Can such studies be used to generate hypotheses for testing in later research only? We developed a method which can allow for formal hypothesis testing on a data set collected without a priori hypotheses in the protocol. We surveyed experienced physicians and nurses treating patients, to obtain independent expectations about differences in QoL dimensions. These ‘staff expectations’ will be used in the analysis of QoL data collected from breast cancer patients taking part in three randomized trials of adjuvant therapy. We propose frameworks for the informal and formal use of the experience of the staff in testing for group differences in patients' QoL scores. The method described here is anticipated to be useful for QoL studies in general, even when a priori hypotheses were specified before the studies were initiated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995; 310: 170.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Michels KB, Rosner BA. Data trawling: to fish or not to fish. Lancet 1996; 348: 1152-1153.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc 1996; 276: 637-639.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Staquet M, Berzon R, Osoba D, Machin D. Guidelines for reporting results of quality of life assessments in clinical trials. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 496-502.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Tannock IF. False-positive results in clinical trials: multiple significance tests and the problem of unreported comparisons. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88: 206-207.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. DBCG-89. Program for Treatment and Follow-up of Patients With Primary, Operable Breast Cancer. Copenhagen: DBCG-Sekretariatet, 1989 (in Danish).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 365-376.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361-370.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Groenvold M. Quality of life in breast cancer adjuvant therapy: validation and pilot testing of a combination of questionnaires. Breast 1997; 6: 97-107.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Groenvold M, Bjorner JB, Klee MC, Kreiner S. Test for item bias in a quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 805-816.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Groenvold M, Klee MC, Sprangers MAG, Aaronson NK. Validation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire through combined qualitative and quantitative assessment of patient-observer agreement. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 441-450.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Altman DG, Bland JM. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. BMJ 1995; 311: 485.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Spiegelhalter DJ, Freedman LS, Parmar MKB. Bayesian approaches to randomised trials. J R Stat Soc 1994; 157: 357-416.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lilford RJ, Braunholtz D. The statistical basis of public policy: a paradigm shift is overdue. BMJ 1996; 313: 603-607.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fayers PM, Ashby D, Parmar MKB. Tutorial in biostatistics. Bayesian data monitoring in clinical trials. Stat Med 1997; 16: 1413-1430.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 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: 743-760.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Groenvold, M., Fayers, P.M. Testing for differences in multiple quality of life dimensions: generating hypotheses from the experience of hospital staff. Qual Life Res 7, 479–486 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008818206511

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008818206511

Navigation