Showing posts with label cancer control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cancer control. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Quality control in ovarian cancer surgery
If the profession does not institute adequate internal regulation of the quality of ovarian cancer surgery, regulation is likely to be imposed by government.
add your opinions
cancer control
,
quality
,
surgery
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
full free access: (references Dr Folkman 1971) Antiangiogenic Therapies in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (printer-friendly)
Source: Posted: 03/22/2011; Cancer Control. 2011;18(1):31-43. © 2011 H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Inc.
add your opinions
antiangiogenic
,
Avastin
,
cancer control
,
Folkman
,
h lee moffitt
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Cancer Patients' Roles in Treatment Decisions: Do Characteristics of the Decision Influence Roles? JCO
Purpose
Patients with more active roles in decisions are more satisfied and may have better health outcomes. Younger and better educated patients have more active roles in decisions, but whether patients' roles in decisions differ by characteristics of the decision itself is unknown.
Conclusion
Patients making decisions about treatments for which no evidence supports benefit and decisions about noncurative treatments reported more physician control, which suggests that patients may not want the responsibility of deciding on treatments that will not cure them. Better strategies for shared decision making may be needed when there is no evidence to support benefit of a treatment or when patients have terminal illnesses that cannot be cured.
add your opinions
cancer control
,
characteristics
,
decision making
,
influences
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Response: An opportunity to refine our understanding of "response shift" and to educate researchers on designing quality research studies
Journal Quality of Life Research
Issue Volume 19, Number 4 / May, 2010
Commentary
An opportunity to refine our understanding of “response shift” and to educate researchers on designing quality research studies: response to Ubel, Peeters, and Smith
Bryce B. Reeve1 Contact Information
(1) Outcomes Research Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, EPN 4088, 6130 Executive Blvd., MSC 7344, Bethesda, MD 20892-7344, USA
Abstract
There is no advantage at this time to abandon the term “response shift” as suggested by Ubel et al. (Qual Life Res, 2010). The term is well known in the research field and has impacted the way we think about measuring quality of life (QOL) longitudinally. However, Ubel et al. (Qual Life Res, 2010) have provided the incentive to start an open dialogue on the subject with opportunities to refine the language of response shift and educate researchers. In this article, we identify opportunities in designing research studies to minimize or account for response shifts by considering the (1) selection of QOL concepts to measure, (2) questionnaires used to assess the QOL concepts, (3) design of the research study, (4) target population, and (5) analyses and reporting of results. Careful consideration of each of these issues will help us identify new methodologies and improved study designs that will move the QOL research field forward.
add your opinions
cancer control
,
outcomes research
,
QOL
,
response shift
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)