Trial reportQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2005
Effect of order of administration of health-related quality of life interview instruments on responses.
Trial report in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Impacts of the preceding cancer-specific health-related quality of life instruments on the responses to the subsequent EQ-5D-5L.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Trial
- Effects of patient-reported outcome assessment order.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Trial
- Reference bias: presentation of extreme health states prior to EQ-VAS improves health-related quality of life scores. a randomised cross-over trial.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2010Trial
- Comparing the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-3L in a general population sample of adults.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Population Norms for the EQ-5D-5L, PROPr and SF-6D in Hungary.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine the effect on patient responses from the order in which the generic health-related and vision-targeted instruments are administered in a set of randomized clinical trials of intraocular surgery. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients who agreed to enroll in the Submacular Surgery Trials (SST) completed baseline quality of life interviews prior to random assignment to surgery or observation. Interviews were conducted by trained interviewers located at the SST Coordinating Center, via a computer-assisted telephone interview system that randomly assigned the order of instrument administration. Either the generic health-related instruments were administered first, the SF-36 Health Survey (SF-36) followed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), followed by the vision-targeted instruments, National Eye Institute-Vision Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) followed by the SST-Vision Preference Value Scale, or the vision-targeted questions were asked first, followed by the generic health instruments. The four instruments have 25 subscales total.
resultsOf the 1015 patients enrolled in the SST, 992 patients had all four instruments administered in random order: 483 (49%) patients responded to the generic instruments first and 509 (51%) patients responded to the vision-targeted instruments first. Order of administration produced significantly different scores for three health status subscales: SF-36 mental health, HADS depression and HADS anxiety (p < or = 0.05, Wilcoxon rank sum test).
conclusionsOverall, the order of administration did not have a large effect on responses to the baseline interviews in this study. However, three mental health subscales were affected by order, though the order effect was small in magnitude. When the generic health instruments followed the vision-targeted instrument the HADS depression and anxiety scores were higher and the SF-36 mental health scores were lower, both suggesting poorer mental health status. Thus, the order of administration in other settings in which both a generic health-related instrument and a condition-targeted instrument are used may be decided based on individual study goals and priorities but order of administration should be consistent throughout the study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15892438What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.