Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/104931
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Composite outcome measures in a pragmatic clinical trial of chronic heart failure management: a comparative assessment
Author: Chang, S.
Davidson, P.
Newton, P.
Macdonald, P.
Carrington, M.
Marwick, T.
Horowitz, J.
Krum, H.
Reid, C.
Chan, Y.
Scuffham, P.
Sibbritt, D.
Stewart, S.
On behalf of the WHICH Investigators
Citation: International Journal of Cardiology, 2015; 185:62-68
Publisher: Elsevier
Issue Date: 2015
ISSN: 0167-5273
1874-1754
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Sungwon Chang, Patricia M. Davidson, Phillip J. Newton, Peter Macdonald, Melinda J. Carrington, Thomas H.Marwick, John D. Horowitz, Henry Krumg, Christopher M. Reid, Yih Kai Chan, Paul A. Scuffhamh, David Sibbritt, Simon Stewart, On behalf of the WHICH Investigators
Abstract: Background: A number of composite outcomes have been developed to capture the perspective of the patient, clinician and objective measures of health in assessing heart failure outcomes. To date there has been a limited examination in the composition of these outcomes. Methods and results: Three commonly used scoring systems in heart failure trials: Packer's composite, Patient Journey and the African American Heart Failure Trial (A-HeFT) scores were compared in assessing outcomes from the Which heart failure intervention is most cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing hospital care (WHICH(?)) Trial. Comparability and interpretability of these outcomes and the influence of each component to the final outcome were examined. Despite all three composite outcomes incorporating mortality, hospitalisation and quality of life (QoL), the contribution of each individual component to the final outcomes differed. The component with the most influence in deteriorating condition for the Packer's composite was hospitalisation (67.7%), while in Patient Journey it was QoL (61.5%) and for A-HeFT composite score it was mortality (45.4%). Conclusions: The contribution made by each component varied in subtle, but important ways. This study emphasises the importance of understanding the value systemof the composite outcomes to enable meaningful interpretation of results.
Keywords: Chronic heart failure; composite outcome; outcome assessment
Rights: © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
RMID: 0030067922
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.071
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/418967
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.