Oncology QOL Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting

描述(由申请人提供)： 这项建议的目的是在以下方面举行公开注册会议 评价生活质量(QOL)测量的临床意义 肿瘤学将于2002年4月5日至6日在罗切斯特的梅奥诊所举行， 明尼苏达州。这次会议的主要目标是传播和辩论 由于先前邀请国协商一致而产生的协商一致声明 开会。这次共识会议于2000年10月6日至7日举行。我们带来了 30位顶尖专家齐聚一堂，探讨具有临床意义的课题 给梅奥诊所的一个“智囊团”，目标是创造一种 关于这一主题的科学总结。这一共识的主要成果是 会议将产生一系列六篇论文(外加第七篇介绍性论文 论文)，以及一本专著，其中列出了主要的方法、挑战和 评估肿瘤学生活质量测量临床意义的解决方案。 拟议的会议将集中讨论会议上讨论的六个主要问题 共识会议。这些措施包括： 1)迄今使用的临床意义的方法(优点、问题) 2)组与个体临床差异显著 3)单项与总分 4)患者与临床医生与人群的临床视角 意义 5)评估随时间变化的情况 6)将生活质量评估融入临床实践和沟通 结果 这些信息将为临床医生提供切实的信息， 对评估生活质量感兴趣：对于那些争论何时生活质量 仪器测量的变化代表着临床上的重大变化 有耐心的。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The purpose of this proposal is to hold an open registration conference on assessing clinical significance for quality of life (QOL) measurement in oncology to be held April 5-6, 2002 at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. The primary goals of this meeting are to disseminate and debate consensus statements produced as a result of the prior invitational consensus meeting. This consensus meeting was held October 6-7, 2000. We brought together thirty of the leading experts on the topic of clinical significance to a "think tank" at the Mayo Clinic with the goal of producing a state-of- the-science summary on this topic. The major outcome of this consensus meeting was to produce a series of six papers (plus a seventh introductory paper), and a monograph which sets out the primary methods, challenges, and solutions for assessing clinical significance for QOL measurement in oncology. The proposed conference will focus on the six primary issues discussed at the consensus meeting. These include: 1) methods used to date for clinical significance (advantages, problems) 2) group versus individual clinical significant differences 3) single item versus summated scale scores 4) patient versus clinician versus population perspective of clinical significance 5) assessing changes over time 6) incorporating QOL assessment into clinical practice and communicating results This information will provide tangible information for clinicians who are interested in assessing QOL: and for researchers who debate when a QOL instrument measurement change represents a clinical significant change for the patient.