Your browser version may not work well with NCBI's Web applications. More information here...

Recent Activity

Items 1 - 20 of 116
of 6Next
1:

Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer.

Pickard AS, Neary MP, Cella D.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Dec 21;5:70.

PMID: 18154669 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2:

Does quality of life of COPD patients as measured by the generic EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire differentiate between COPD severity stages?

Rutten-van Mölken MP, Oostenbrink JB, Tashkin DP, Burkhart D, Monz BU.

Chest. 2006 Oct;130(4):1117-28.

PMID: 17035446 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3:

Quality of life and utility in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Quality-of-life Study Group of the Master 2 Project in Pharmacoeconomics.

Trippoli S, Vaiani M, Lucioni C, Messori A.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(8):855-63.

PMID: 11596837 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4:

US and UK versions of the EQ-5D preference weights: does choice of preference weights make a difference?

Huang IC, Willke RJ, Atkinson MJ, Lenderking WR, Frangakis C, Wu AW.

Qual Life Res. 2007 Aug;16(6):1065-72. Epub 2007 Apr 6.

PMID: 17415683 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5:

The responsiveness of EQ-5D utility scores in patients with depression: A comparison with instruments measuring quality of life, psychopathology and social functioning.

Günther OH, Roick C, Angermeyer MC, König HH.

J Affect Disord. 2008 Jan;105(1-3):81-91. Epub 2007 May 29.

PMID: 17532051 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

6:

Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D.

Walters SJ, Brazier JE.

Qual Life Res. 2005 Aug;14(6):1523-32. Review.

PMID: 16110932 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

7:

Using multiple anchor- and distribution-based estimates to evaluate clinically meaningful change on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Biologic Response Modifiers (FACT-BRM) instrument.

Yost KJ, Sorensen MV, Hahn EA, Glendenning GA, Gnanasakthy A, Cella D.

Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):117-27.

PMID: 15804320 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

8:

What is a clinically meaningful change on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) Questionnaire? Results from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Study 5592.

Cella D, Eton DT, Fairclough DL, Bonomi P, Heyes AE, Silberman C, Wolf MK, Johnson DH.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2002 Mar;55(3):285-95.

PMID: 11864800 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

9:

A comparison of EQ-5D index scores using the UK, US, and Japan preference weights in a Thai sample with type 2 diabetes.

Sakthong P, Charoenvisuthiwongs R, Shabunthom R.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Sep 23;6:71.

PMID: 18811935 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

10:

Comparison of the SF-6D and the EQ-5D in patients with coronary heart disease.

van Stel HF, Buskens E.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Mar 25;4:20.

PMID: 16563170 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

11:

Performance of the EQ-5D in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

Bushnell DM, Martin ML, Ricci JF, Bracco A.

Value Health. 2006 Mar-Apr;9(2):90-7.

PMID: 16626412 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

12:

Validation of the EQ-5D in patients with a history of acute coronary syndrome.

Ellis JJ, Eagle KA, Kline-Rogers EM, Erickson SR.

Curr Med Res Opin. 2005 Aug;21(8):1209-16.

PMID: 16083530 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

13:

Minimally important differences were estimated for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) instrument using a combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches.

Yost KJ, Cella D, Chawla A, Holmgren E, Eton DT, Ayanian JZ, West DW.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Dec;58(12):1241-51. Epub 2005 Oct 13.

PMID: 16291468 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

14:

A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale.

Eton DT, Cella D, Yost KJ, Yount SE, Peterman AH, Neuberg DS, Sledge GW, Wood WC.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Sep;57(9):898-910.

PMID: 15504633 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

15:

Health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cancer.

Pickard AS, Wilke CT, Lin HW, Lloyd A.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(5):365-84. Review.

PMID: 17488136 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

16:

An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population.

Petrou S, Hockley C.

Health Econ. 2005 Nov;14(11):1169-89.

PMID: 15942981 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

17:

The validity and responsiveness of three quality of life measures in the assessment of psoriasis patients: results of a phase II study.

Shikiar R, Willian MK, Okun MM, Thompson CS, Revicki DA.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Sep 27;4:71.

PMID: 17005043 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

18:

The relationship between body mass index and health-related quality of life: comparing the EQ-5D, EuroQol VAS and SF-6D.

Sach TH, Barton GR, Doherty M, Muir KR, Jenkinson C, Avery AJ.

Int J Obes (Lond). 2007 Jan;31(1):189-96. Epub 2006 May 9.

PMID: 16682976 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

19:

Combining distribution- and anchor-based approaches to determine minimally important differences: the FACIT experience.

Yost KJ, Eton DT.

Eval Health Prof. 2005 Jun;28(2):172-91.

PMID: 15851772 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

20:

Parent-proxy EQ-5D ratings of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in the US and the UK.

Matza LS, Secnik K, Mannix S, Sallee FR.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(8):777-90.

PMID: 16097840 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Items 1 - 20 of 116
of 6Next