The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30
The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf00439229
复制
发表时间：
1996-12-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
King, MT
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
King, MT
虽然生活质量(QOL)评估正变得越来越普遍，但解释结果仍然存在问题。本文以QLQ-C30为例，展示了一种开发基于临床的生活质量结果解释的方法。对发表的14项QLQ-C30研究的结果进行了整理，这些研究根据患者的表现状况、体重减轻、毒性、疾病的程度或严重程度对患者进行分组。塔式临床状态组一般具有较差的生活质量。最大的差异是表现状态组之间的差异，最小的差异是局部疾病患者组和转移患者组之间的差异。身体和角色得分在患者组中的平均值范围最大，并在临床组之间显示出最大的差异，而认知和情感得分的平均值和差异范围最小。病情较重的组比健康组有更大的得分标准差。给出了相对较大和较小的均值和差异，以及相应的影响大小。总而言之，这些结果提供了对均值和差异的相对大小的感觉，以及产生这些结果的临床组的类型，从而提供了解释QLQ-C30结果的基于临床的基准。
While quality of life (QOL) assessment is becoming more Common, interpreting the results remains problematic. This paper demonstrates an approach to developing clinically-based interpretations for QOL outcomes, using the QLQ-C30 as an example. The results from 14 published QLQ-C30 studies which group patients by performance status, weight loss, toxicity, extent or severity of disease are collated. Groups with tower clinical status generally have worse QOL. The largest differences are between performance status groups, and the smallest differences are between groups of patients with local disease and those with metastases. The physical and role scores have the largest ranges of means across patient groups, and show the largest differences between clinical groups, while the cognitive and emotional scores have the smallest ranges of means and differences. Sicker groups have larger score standard deviations than healthier groups. Relatively large and small means and differences, and corresponding effect sizes, are presented. Collectively, the results provide a sense of the relative sizes of means and of differences, and of the types of clinical groups which give rise to them, thereby providing clinically-based benchmarks by which to interpret QLQ-C30 results.