PubMed · 10665242
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M A Koda-Kimble. Back to the basic sciences!. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1086-5802(16)31049-x
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Our ability to prevent, cure or modify disease, as compared with relieving symptoms, has changed beyond recognition in the past half century. With the completion of the Human Genome Project and rapid advances in understanding of molecular biology and in technologies, our ability to target disease mechanisms and optimise an individual's responses will improve exponentially.
BACKGROUND: The rapid evolution of outcomes research during the last decade has led to increasing emphasis on measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, the relatively recent advent of these measures makes it difficult to decide how much weight to attribute to them in decisions about the value of drug therapy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to discuss the factors that affect the relative importance of HRQOL data in determining the value of drug therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The relative importance of HRQOL data depends on the type of condition and the type of treatment. In chronic conditions, HRQOL may be considered a primary measure of efficacy. In acute conditions, HRQOL is not likely to be a primary efficacy measure, although excluding HRQOL measures may lead to an underestimation of treatment effects. Measures of HRQOL are also likely to be important in the assessment of palliative treatments and, to some extent, preventive treatments (primarily in the measurement of adverse effects). HRQOL measures will be less important in the assessment of curative treatments because these types of treatment are most relevant in acute conditions.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.