Hazards of Quality-of-Life Data for Clinical Decision Making

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (90090) ◽  
pp. 82s-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Somerfield
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Life Data

Hazards of Quality-of-Life Data for Clinical Decision Making

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 594-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Somerfield ◽  
Aminah Jatoi ◽  
Phuong L. Nguyen ◽  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Jeff Sloan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Life Data

Goals of palliative cancer therapy.

1993 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 378-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Porzsolt ◽  
I Tannock
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Palliative Treatment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Oncology Practice

The major conclusions of the Workshop on Goals of Palliative Cancer Therapy are as follows: 1. The goals of any cancer therapy should be stated explicitly. 2. If the goal of treatment is palliation, this should be documented according to one of the established and validated methods for assessment of quality of life. Several validated methods are available, and although imperfect, have been shown to give reliable information. 3. The use of simple measures of quality of life (eg, symptom checklists, pain assessment cards) should become routine in oncology practice. The act of introducing such measures improves palliation. 4. Measures of cost-effectiveness should be used more widely in clinical decision making to ensure the appropriate deployment of resources. 5. There must be improved education of all health professionals with regard to the multiple methods for provision of palliative treatment to cancer patients and the assessment of palliation.

scholarly journals Cronic Kidney Disease, Life Quality Assessment Of Patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Marsida Duli ◽  
Qamil Dika ◽  
Matilda Bushati
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Healthy Population ◽  
Important Indicator

Assessing quality of life in patients with varying degrees of chronic kidney disease is an important issue because of its impact on clinical decision-making as increasing the efficiency of resources in the health system. Through this survey provided an attempt to assess the quality of life of patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing dialysis. Commitment to maximize their functioning and well-being constitutes the essence of the purpose of health care. In recent decades elaborate SF 36 is cut by a gauge derive so simple and basic that helps to evaluate the function of the target of researchers, a certain age group, a disease or a treatment group. Short questionnaire forms SF36 instrument gauge is used to determine the level of quality of life in patients with chronic renal failure under the different stages of treatment with dialysis. The study involved 206 people, 112 from patients to Tirana and Shkodra and 94 healthy persons, who collaborated consensually for completing the questionnaires. Based on the results, the quality of life of dialysis patients is significantly worse than that of the healthy population and patients with other injuries less severe of renal function. Survey indicates that a more holistic approach to be used in the treatment of patients with chronic kidney disease including clinical decision making and patient perception. Precisely for this it is recommended to enter the practice of clinical interest that a set of questionnaires that provide information on patients' perception of health as an important indicator that facilitates the physician-patient collaboration in order to better treatment of the disease and increase the quality the life of the patient.

AI-based clinical decision-making systems in palliative medicine: ethical challenges

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2021-002948
Author(s):  
Ludovica De Panfilis ◽  
Carlo Peruselli ◽  
Silvia Tanzi ◽  
Carlo Botrugno
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Ethical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Palliative Care Consultation

BackgroundImproving palliative care (PC) is demanding due to the increase in people with PC needs over the next few years. An early identification of PC needs is fundamental in the care approach: it provides effective patient-centred care and could improve outcomes such as patient quality of life, reduction of the overall length of hospitalisation, survival rate prolongation, the satisfaction of both the patients and caregivers and cost-effectiveness.MethodsWe reviewed literature with the objective of identifying and discussing the most important ethical challenges related to the implementation of AI-based data processing services in PC and advance care planning.ResultsAI-based mortality predictions can signal the need for patients to obtain access to personalised communication or palliative care consultation, but they should not be used as a unique parameter to activate early PC and initiate an ACP. A number of factors must be included in the ethical decision-making process related to initiation of ACP conversations, among which are autonomy and quality of life, the risk of worsening healthcare status, the commitment by caregivers, the patients’ psychosocial and spiritual distress and their wishes to initiate EOL discussionsConclusionsDespite the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-based services into routine healthcare practice could have a positive effect of promoting early activation of ACP by means of a timely identification of PC needs, from an ethical point of view, the provision of these automated techniques raises a number of critical issues that deserve further exploration.

scholarly journals Impact of using spirometry on clinical decision making and quality of life in children: protocol for a single centre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e050974
Author(s):  
Wicharn Boonjindasup ◽  
Julie M Marchant ◽  
Margaret S McElrea ◽  
Stephanie T Yerkovich ◽  
Ian Brent Masters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
T Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionAlthough spirometry has been available for decades, it is underused in paediatric practice, other than in specialist clinics. This is unsurprising as there is limited evidence on the benefit of routine spirometry in improving clinical decision making and/or outcomes for children. We hypothesised that using spirometry for children being evaluated for respiratory diseases impacts on clinical decision making and/or improves patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) and/or quality of life (QoL), compared with not using spirometry.Methods and analysisWe are undertaking a randomised controlled trial (commenced in March 2020) that will include 106 children (aged 4–18 years) recruited from respiratory clinics at Queensland Children’s Hospital, Australia. Inclusion criteria are able to perform reliable spirometry and a parent/guardian who can complete questionnaire(s). Children (1:1 allocation) are randomised to clinical medical review with spirometry (intervention group) or without spirometry (control group) within strata of consultation status (new/review), and cough condition (present/absent). The primary outcome is change in clinical decision making. The secondary outcomes are change in PROM scores, opinions regarding spirometry and degree of diagnosis certainty. Intergroup differences of these outcomes will be determined by χ2 test or unpaired t-test (or Mann-Whitney if not normally distributed). Change in outcomes within the control group after review of spirometry will also be assessed by McNemar’s test or paired t-test/Wilcoxon signed-rank test.Ethics and disseminationThe Human Research Ethics Committee of the Queensland Children’s Hospital approved the study. The trial results will be disseminated through conference presentations, teaching avenues and publications.Trial registration numberACTRN12619001686190; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document