HOPE Protocol [PDF, 420KB] - National Cancer Survivorship Initiative

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8 Health status and quality of life are distinct concepts; improvement with one doesn’t necessarily correlate with improvements in the other, yet both are important indicators of outcome. In a number of studies self-rated health has been found to be an excellent predictor of future health and so improvements in this will be important for long-term wellbeing even if benefits are not yet evident. The most widely used measure of self-rated health is a one-item rating scale used in the National Health Interview Survey (Idler and Angel, 2000). 20/08/09 16
References 1. Adler NE, Newman K. (2002). Socioeconomic disparities in health: Pathways and policies. Health Affairs, 21(2), 60-76. 2. Allberry, J (2008) Cancer Reform Strategy: Maintaining Momentum, Building for the Future – First Annual Report. Department of Health, December 2008. 3. Avis NE, Smith K, McGraw S, Smith RG, Petronis VM, Carver CS. Assessing quality of life in adult cancer survivors (QLACS). Qual Life Res 2005;14(4): 1007–1023. 4. Barlow, J.H., Turner, A.P., Wright, C. (2000), "A randomised controlled study of the arthritis self management programme in the UK", Health Education Journal, Vol. 15 No.6, pp.665-80. 5. British Liver Trust. Living a healthy life with long term illness: leaders’ manual. The Board of Trustees, Leland Stanford Junior University, 1999. 6. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2007) Evidence to inform the Cancer Reform Strategy: The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of followup services after treatment for cancer, CRD. 7. Chodosh, J; Morton A.C; Mojica W; Magione M; Suttorp M.J; Hilton L; et al Meta-analysis: chronic disease self management programmes for older adults, Ann Int Med, (2005); 143: 427-438. 8. Clark, N.M. and Gong, M. (2000) Management of chronic disease by practitioners and patients: are we teaching the wrong things British Medical Journal, 320, 572–575. 9. Coulter, A. (1997) Partnerships with patients: the pros and cons of shared clinical decision-making. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 2, 112–121. 10. Coulter A and Ellins J (2006) Patient-focused Interventions: A review of the evidence, Picker Institute Europe (01865 208100) and Health Foundation. 11. Davies, N.J., Kinman, G., Thomas, R.J., Bailey, T.A. (2008) Health Baseline Comparison Theory: Predicting Quality of Life in Breast and Prostate Cancer, Health Psychology Update, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp. 3-12. 12. Davies, NJ (2009a) Self-Management Programmes for Cancer Survivors: A Structured Review of Outcome Measures, commissioned by Macmillan Cancer Support for the NCSI, April 2009. 17
Page 1 and 2: National Cancer Survivorship Initia
Page 3 and 4: activities, and health distress), a
Page 5 and 6: Aim to recruit minimum of 20 partic
Page 7 and 8: 3.3. Project Timetable Recruitment
Page 9 and 10: Table 2: Evaluating the HOPE Self-M
Page 11 and 12: life (QLACS). Feelings of hope Stat
Page 13 and 14: 4.3. Focus Groups and Interviews Fo
Page 15: Footnotes 1 A rapid review aimed at
Page 19 and 20: 26. Lorig K, Sobel DS, Stewart AL,

HOPE Protocol [PDF, 420KB] - National Cancer Survivorship Initiative

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?