ArticleOpen journal of philosophy2013
Detecting When "Quality of Life" Has Been "Enhanced": Estimating Change in Quality of Life Ratings.
Article in Open journal of philosophy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05388019 (Multidisciplinary Ventricular Assist Device Clinic), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Multidisciplinary Ventricular Assist Device Clinic: Feasibility Pilot Study and Quality of Life Impact Assessment
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying Vagus Nerve Stimulation Outcomes in Multifocal Refractory Epilepsy: A Model Across Multiple Surgeries.Cureus · 2024Article
- French cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease scale in Nursing Homes (QOL-AD NH).Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo demonstrate challenges in the estimation of change in quality of life (QOL).
methodsData were taken from a completed clinical trial with negative results. Responses to 13 QOL items were obtained 12 months apart from 258 persons with Alzheimer's disease (AD) participating in a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial with two treatment arms. Two analyses to estimate whether "change" in QOL occurred over 12 months are described. A simple difference (later - earlier) was calculated from total scores (standard approach). A Qualified Change algorithm (novel approach) was applied to each item: differences in ratings were classified as either: improved, worsened, stayed poor, or stayed "positive" (fair, good, excellent). The strengths of evidence supporting a claim that "QOL changed", derived from the two analyses, were compared by considering plausible alternative explanations for, and interpretations of, results obtained under each approach.
resultsTotal score approach: QOL total scores decreased, on average, in the two treatment (both -1.0,
conclusionsTotalling the subjective QOL item ratings collapses over items, and suggests a potentially misleading "overall" level of change (or no change, as in the placebo arm). Leaving the items as individual components of "quality" of life they were intended to capture, and qualifying the direction and amount of change in each, suggests that at least 17% of any group experienced change on every item, with 60% of all observed change being worsening. DISCUSSION: Summarizing QOL item ratings as a total "score" collapses over the face-valid, multi-dimensional components of the construct "quality of life". Qualified Change provides robust evidence of changes to QOL or "enhancements of" life quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.