Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Indices versus profiles — advantages and disadvantages

  • Chapter
Quality of Life Assessment: Key Issues in the 1990s

Abstract

In assessing quality of life, the question arises which measurement strategy is most appropriate in a given clinical trials situation. Choices may pertain to the inclusion of generic versus disease-specific instruments, to patient self-ratings versus expert ratings or to the administration interviews versus questionnaires1,10. Of special importance for the type of data gathered is the decision between the use of indices versus profiles for the assessment of quality of life. This decision requires a reflection on the conceptual, methodological and practical issues involved in making such a choice.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaronson, N.C. Quality of life assessment in clinical trials: methodologic issues. Contr. Clin. Trials 1989; 10: 1955–2085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aaronson, N.K., Bullinger, M. and Ahmedzai, S. A modular approach to quality of life in cancer clinical trials. Rec. Res. Cancer Res. 1988; 111: 231–249.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Berg, R.L. Health Status Indices. Hospital Research and Educational Trust, Chicago, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bergner, M., Bobbit, R.A., Carter, W.B. and Gilson, B.S. The sickness impact profile. Development and final revision of a health status measure. Med. Care 1981; 19: 787–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bullinger, M. and Hasford, J. Testing and evaluating quality of life measures for German clinical trials. Contr. Clin. Trials 1991; 12: 915–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bullinger, M., Heinisch, M., Ludwig, M. and Geier, S. Skalen zur Ferfassung des Wohlbefindens. Psychometrische iiberpriifung des Profile of Mood States (POMS).Z. Diff. Diag. Psychol. 1990; 11: 53–61.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Croog, S.H., Levine, S., Testa, M.A. et. al. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. N. Engl. J. Med. 1986; 314: 1657–1664.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. DuPuy, H.J. The Psychological General Well-Being (PGWB) index. In Wenger, N.K., Mattson, M.E., Furberg, C.D. and Ellinson, J. (eds). Assessment of Quality of Life in Clinical Trials of Cardiovascular Therapies. New York, LeJacq Publishers, 1984, pp. 170–183.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Feinstein, A.R. et. al. Scientific and clinical problems in indices of functional disability. Ann. Intern. Med. 1986; 105: 413–420.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Guyatt, G.H. and Jaeschke, R. Measurement in clinical trials-choosing the appropriate approach. In Spilker, B. (ed.) Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Trials. New York, Raven Press, 1990, pp. 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Guyatt, G., Walter, S. and Norman, G. Measuring change over time-assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J. Chronic Dis. 1987; 40: 171–178.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunt, S. The Nottingham Health Profile. In Wenger, N.K., Mattson, M.E., Furberg, C.D. and Ellinson, J. (eds) Assessment of Quality of Life in Clinical Trials of Cardiovascular Therapies. New York, LeJacq Publishers, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kaplan, R.M., Bush, J.W. and Berry, C.C. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv. Res. 1976; 11: 478–507.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaplan, R. and Stewart, L. Pros and cons of single vs. multi outcome quality of life assessments. In Shumaker, S.A. and Furber, C. (eds). Research on Quality of Life and Cardiovascular Disease. Am. J. Prevent. Med. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kirshner, B. and Guyatt, G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J. Chronic Dis. 1985; 38: 27–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. McDowell, I. and Newell, C. Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. New York, Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  17. McNair, D., Lorr, M. and Droppelman, L.F. Manual for the Profile of Mood States. California, Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Olschewski, M. and Schumacher, M. Statistical analysis of quality of life data in cancer clinical trials. Stat. Med. 1990; 9: 749–763.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Patrick, D.L. and Erickson, P. Assessing health-related quality of life for clinical decision making. In Walker, S.R. and Rosser, R.M. (eds). Quality of Life: Assessment and Application. Lancaster, MTP Press, 1988, pp. 183–197.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pocock, S.J., Geller, N.L. and Tsiatis, A.A. The analysis of multiple endpoints in clinical trials. Biometrics 1987; 43: 487–498.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Spilker, H. Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Trials. New York, Raven Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Spitzer, W.Q., Dobson, A.J., Hall, J., Chesterman, E., Levi, J., Shepherd, R., Battista, R.N. and Catchlove, B.R. Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients. A concise QL-Index for use by physicians. J. Chronic Dis. 1981; 34: 585–597.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Streiner, D.L. and Normann, G. Health Measurement Scales-a Practical Guide to their Development and Use. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tandon, P. Applications of global statistics in analysing quality of life data. Stat. Med. 1990; 9: 819–827.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Walker, S.R. and Rosser, R.M. Quality of Life Assessment and Application. Lancaster, MTP Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ware, J.E. Standards for validating health measures; Definition and content. J. Chronic Dis. 1987; 40: 503–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Monika Bullinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Welsh School of Pharmacy, University of Wales College, Cardiff, UK

    Stuart R. Walker (Director of the Centre for Medicines Research, Carshalton, and Honorary Professor) (Director of the Centre for Medicines Research, Carshalton, and Honorary Professor)

  2. University College and Middlesex School of Medicine, London University, London, UK

    Rachel M. Rosser (Professor of Psychiatry and Head of Department) (Professor of Psychiatry and Head of Department)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bullinger, M. (1993). Indices versus profiles — advantages and disadvantages. In: Walker, S.R., Rosser, R.M. (eds) Quality of Life Assessment: Key Issues in the 1990s. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2988-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2988-6_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5328-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-2988-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation