Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Health-Related Quality of Life

  • Chapter
Clinical Research Methods for Surgeons

Abstract

Traditionally, the primary end points in evaluations of medical therapies have included improvement in clinical outcomes, cure, and survival; however, the advent of the medical outcomes movement and the worldwide effort to contain the rising costs of care have underscored the importance of patient-centered outcomes, such as health-related quality of life (HRQOL). This trend is especially relevant for individuals with chronic, nonfatal conditions who live for many years after diagnosis. If survival time is long, even modest changes in HRQOL may have a profound impact on the patient. Hence, in many cases, HRQOL may be just as important as survival, and treatment choices at various points in the chronic disease trajectory must constantly balance the dual goals of optimizing both quantity and quality of life. In light of evidence that survival and clinical outcomes may be similar across treatments for many conditions, quality of life considerations may be the critical factor in medical decision making for some.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Fayers PM Jones DR. Measuring and analysing quality of life in cancer clinical trials a review. Stat Med 1983;24429–446

    Google Scholar 

  2. Feeny DH Torrance GW. Incorporating utility-based quality-of-life assessment measures in clinical trials.Two examples. Med Care 1989;273 Suppl.S190–S204

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sadura A, Pater J, Osoba D, et al. Quality-of-life assessment: patient compliance with questionnaire completion. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84 (13):1023–1026.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fossa SD. Quality of life after palliative radiotherapy in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer: single institution experience. Br J Urol 1994;74 (3):345–351.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Moinpour CM, Lovato LC. Ensuring the quality of quality of life data: the Southwest Oncology Groupexperience. Stat Med 1998;17 (5-7):641–651.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Patrick DL, Erickson P. Assessing health-related quality of life for clinical decision-making. In: Walker SR, Rosser RM, eds. Quality of life assessment: key issues in the 1990s. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993:11–64.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Osoba D. Measuring the effect of cancer on quality of life. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  8. WHO. Constitution of the World Health Organization, basic documents. Geneva: WHO, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fitzpatrick JM, Kirby RS, Krane RJ, et al. Sexual dysfunction associated with the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 1998;33(6):513–522.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chang VT, Thaler HT, Polyak TA, et al. Quality of life and survival: the role of multidimensional symptom assessment. Cancer 1998;83(1):173–179.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cassileth BR Soloway MS Vogelzang NJ et al. Patients’ choice of treatment in stage D prostate cancer. Urology 1989;33(5 Suppl.):57–62]

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tulsky DS. An introduction to test theory. Oncology (Huntingt) 1990;4(5):43–48.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Testa MA, Simonson DC. Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes. N Engl J Med 1996;334(13):835–840.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Guyatt GH, Naylor CD, Juniper E, et al. Users’ guides to the medical literature. XII. How to use articles about health-related quality of life. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1997;277(15):1232–1237.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. McSweeny AJ, Creer TL. Health-related quality-of-life assessment in medical care. Dis Mon 1995;41(1):1–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Aaronson NK. Methodologic issues in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. Cancer 1991;67(3 Suppl.):844–850.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 1991;12(4 Suppl.):142S–158S.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Adler NE, Epel ES, Castellazzo G, Ickovics JR. Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychol 2000;196(6):586–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nelson EC, Landgraf JM, Hays RD, Wasson JH, Kirk JW. The functional status of patients. How can it be measured in physicians’ offices? Med Care 1990;28(12):1111–1126.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Finlay WM, Lyons E. Methodological issues in interviewing and using self-report questionnaires with people with mental retardation. Psychol Assess 2001;13(3):319–335.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Fossa SD, Aaronson NK, Newling D, et al. Quality of life and treatment of hormone resistant metastatic prostatic cancer. The EORTC Genito-Urinary Group. Eur J Cancer 1990;26(11-12):1133–1136.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Litwin MS, Lubeck DP, Henning JM, Carroll PR. Differences in urologist and patient assessments of health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer: results of the CaPSURE database. J Urol 1998;159(6):1988–1992.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Slevin ML, Plant H, Lynch D, Drinkwater J, Gregory WM. Who should measure quality of life, the doctor or the patient? Br J Cancer 1988;57(1):109–112.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fossa SD, Moynihan C, Serbouti S. Patients’ and doctors’ perception of long-term morbidity in patients with testicular cancer clinical stage I. A descriptive pilot study [see comments]. Support Care Cancer, 1996;4(2):118–128.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lampic C, von Essen L, Peterson VW, Larsson G, Sjoden PO. Anxiety and depression in hospitalized patients with cancer: agreement in patient-staff dyads. Cancer Nurs 1996;19(6):419–428.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MA, et al. Value of caregiver ratings in evaluating the quality of life of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15(3):1206–1217.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sprangers MA, Aaronson NK. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45(7):743–760.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kornblith AB, Herr HW, Ofman US, Scher HI, Holland JC. Quality of life of patients with prostate cancer and their spouses: the value of a data base in clinical care. Cancer 1994;73:2791–2802.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Testa MA. Parallel perspectives on quality of life during antihypertensive therapy: impact of responder, survey environment, and questionnaire structure. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993;21(Suppl. 2):S18–S25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S, Sargent D, Schroeder G. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA 2002;287(3):321–328.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Talcott JA, Rieker P, Clark JA, et al. Patient-reported symptoms after primary therapy for early prostate cancer: results of a prospective cohort study. J Clin Oncol 1998;16(1):275–283.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Herrmann D. Reporting current, past, and changed health status. What we know about distortion. Med Care 1995;33(4 Suppl.):AS89–AS94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Aseltine RH, Jr., Carlson KJ, Fowler FJ, Jr., Barry MJ. Comparing prospective and retrospective mea-sures of treatment outcomes. Med Care 1995;33(4 Suppl.):AS67–AS76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Litwin MS. How to measure survey reliability and validity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sprangers MA, Cull A, Groenvold M, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group. Qual Life Res 1998;7(4):291–300.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res 2003;12(3):229–238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Messick S. The once and future issues of validity: assessing the meaning and consequences of measure-ment. In: Wainer H, Braun HI, eds. Test validity. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zwinderman AH. The measurement of change of quality of life in clinical trials. Stat Med 1990;9(8):931–942.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Olschewski M, Schumacher M. Statistical analysis of quality of life data in cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 1990;9(7):749–763.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Sprangers MA. Response-shift bias: a challenge to the assessment of patients’ quality of life in cancer clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rev 1996;22(Suppl. A):55–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, et al. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II. Pharmacoeconomics 1999;15(2):141–155.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003;41(5):582–592.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Sloan JA, Dueck A. Issues for statisticians in conducting analyses and translating results for quality of life end points in clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 2004;14(1):73–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 1987;40(2):171–178.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77(4):371–383.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Patrick DL, Deyo RA. Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med Care 1989;27(3 Suppl.):S217–S232.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Fossa SD, Woehre H, Kurth KH, et al. Influence of urological morbidity on quality of life in patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 1997;31(Suppl. 3):3–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kagawa-Singer M, Kassim-Lakha S. A strategy to reduce cross-cultural miscommunication and increase the likelihood of improving health outcomes. Acad Med 2003;78(6):577–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sagnier PP, Girman CJ, Garraway M, et al. International comparison of the community prevalence of symptoms of prostatism in four countries. Eur Urol 1996;29(1):15–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Boyle P. Cultural and linguistic validation of questionnaires for use in international studies: the nine-item BPH-specific quality-of-life scale. Eur Urol 1997;32(Suppl. 2):50–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Vela Navarrete R, Martin Moreno JM, Calahorra FJ, et al. [Cultural and linguistic validation, in Spanish, of the International Prostatic Symptoms Scale (I-PSS)]. Actas Urol Esp 1994;18(8):841–847.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Gill TM, Feinstein AR. A critical appraisal of the quality of quality of life measurements. JAMA 1994;272(8):619–626.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SK. tSF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a user’ s manual. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ware JE, Jr., Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30(6):473–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Gandek B, Ware JE, Jr., Aaronson NK, et al. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assess-ment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51(11):1149–1158.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Res 1976;11(4):478–507.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Kaplan RM, Ganiats TG, Sieber WJ, Anderson JP. The Quality of Well-Being Scale: critical similarities and differences with SF-36. Int J Qual Health Care 1998;10(6):509–520.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Kaplan RM, Sieber WJ, Ganiats TG. The quality of well-being scale: comparison of the interviewer-administered version with a self-administered questionnaire. Psychol Health 1997;12:783–791.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Kaplan RM, Bush JW. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol 1982;1:61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. A general health policy model: update and applications. Health Serv Res 1988;23(2):203–235.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Anderson JP, Kaplan RM, Berry CC, Bush JW, Rumbaut RG. Interday reliability of function assessment for a health status measure. The Quality of Well-Being scale. Med Care 1989;27(11):1076–1083.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981;19(8):787–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Pollard WE, Martin DP, Gilson BS. The sickness impact profile: validation of a health status measure. Med Care 1976;14(1):57–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Hunt SM, McEwen J, McKenna SP. Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiolo-gists. J R Coll Gen Pract 1985;35(273):185–188.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. McDowell IW, Martini CJ, Waugh W. A method for self-assessment of disability before and after hip replacement operations. BMJ 1978;2(6141):857–859.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Martini CJ, McDowell I. Health status: patient and physician judgments. Health Serv Res 1976;11(4):08–515.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Ware J, Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996;34(3):220–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-12: How to score the SF-12 physical and mental health summaryscales. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, et al. Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assess-ment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51(11):1171–1178.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Norcross JC, Guadagnoli E, Prochaska JO. Factor structure of the Profile of Mood States (POMS): two partial replications. J Clin Psychol 1984;40(5):1270–1277.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Jacobson AF, Weiss BL, Steinbook RM, Brauzer B, Goldstein BJ. The measurement of psychological states by use of factors derived from a combination of items from mood and symptom checklists. J Clin Psychol 1978;34(3):677–685.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Cella DF, Jacobsen PB, Orav EJ, et al. A brief POMS measure of distress for cancer patients. J Chronic Dis 1987;40(10):939–942.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Albrecht RR, Ewing SJ. Standardizing the administration of the Profile of Mood States (POMS): devel-opment of alternative word lists. J Pers Assess 1989;53(1):31–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Baker F, Denniston M, Zabora J, Polland A, Dudley WN. A POMS short form for cancer patients: psychometric and structural evaluation. Psychooncology 2002;11(4):273–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85(5):365–376.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 1993;11(3):570–579.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Schag CA, Ganz PA, Heinrich RL. CAncer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-short form (CARES-SF). A cancer specific rehabilitation and quality of life instrument. Cancer 1991;68(6):1406–1413.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Schag CA, Ganz PA, Wing DS, Sim MS, Lee JJ. Quality of life in adult survivors of lung, colon and prostate cancer. Qual Life Res 1994;3(2):127–141.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Schag CA, Heinrich RL. Development of a comprehensive quality of life measurement tool: CARES. Oncology (Huntingt)] 1990 ;4(5):135–1

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Curran D, Fossa S, Aaronson N, Kiebert G, Keuppens E, Hall R. Baseline quality of life of patients with advanced prostate cancer. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group (GUT-CCG). Eur J Cancer 1997;33(11):1809–1814.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Sprangers MA, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol 1996;14(10):2756–2768.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Bergman B, Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Kaasa S, Sullivan M. The EORTC QLQ-LC13: a modular supplement to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials. EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. Eur J Cancer 1994;5:635–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Aaronson NK, van Andel G. An international field study of the reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30 version 3 and a disease-specific questionnaire module (QLQ-PR25) for assessing the quality of life of patients with prostate cancer. Brussels: EORTC Data Center, 2001. (EORTC protocol 15011-30011).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Bjordal K, Kaasa S, Mastekaasa A. Quality of life in patients treated for head and neck cancer: a follow-up study 7 to 11 years after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1994;28(4):847–856.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Ward WL, Hahn EA, Mo F, Hernandez L, Tulsky DS, Cella D. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) quality of life instrument. Qual Life Res 1999;8(3):181–195.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Brady MJ, Cella DF, Mo F, et al. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument. J Clin Oncol 1997;15(3):974–986.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Esper P, Mo F, Chodak G, Sinner M, Cella D, Pienta KJ. Measuring quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate instrument. Urology 1997;50(6):920–928.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Basen-Engquist K, Bodurka-Bevers D, Fitzgerald MA, et al. Reliability and validity of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-ovarian. J Clin Oncol 2001;19(6):1809–1817.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. McQuellon RP, Russell GB, Cella DF, et al. Quality of life measurement in bone marrow transplantation: development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT) scale. Bone Marrow Transplant 1997;19(4):357–368.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Yellen SB, Cella DF, Webster K, Blendowski C, Kaplan E. Measuring fatigue and other anemia-related symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) measurement system. J Pain Symptom Manage 1997;13(2):63–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Cella D. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) Scale: a new tool for the assessment of outcomes in cancer anemia and fatigue. Semin Hematol 1997;34(3 Suppl. 2):13–19.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. de Haes JC, van Knippenberg FC, Neijt JP. Measuring psychological and physical distress in cancer patients: structure and application of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Br J Cancer 1990;62(6):1034–1038.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Litwin MS, Hays RD, Fink A, et al. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure. Med Care 1998;36(7):1002–1012.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Krongrad A, Perczek RE, Burke MA, et al. Reliability of Spanish translations of select urological quality of life instruments. J Urol 1997;158(2):493–496.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Karakiewicz PI, Kattan MW, Tanguay S, et al. Cross-cultural validation of the UCLA prostate cancer index. Urology 2003;61(2):302–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Ogawa O, et al. Development of Japanese version of the UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: a pilot validation study. Int J Clin Oncol 2002;7(5):306–311.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML, Madalinska JB, et al. Measuring disease specific quality of life in localizedprostate cancer: the Dutch experience. Qual Life Res 2003;12(4):459–464.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA

    Mark S. Litwin MD, MPH (Professor of Urology and Health Service, Associate Chairman of Urology)

Authors
  1. Mark S. Litwin MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Urology and Preventive Medicine Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA

    David F. Penson MD, MPH

  2. Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI

    John T. Wei MD, MS

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Litwin, M.S. (2006). Health-Related Quality of Life. In: Penson, D.F., Wei, J.T. (eds) Clinical Research Methods for Surgeons. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-230-4_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-230-4_13

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-326-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-230-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation