scispace - formally typeset
D

Donald L. Patrick

Researcher at University of Washington

Publications -  408
Citations -  55805

Donald L. Patrick is an academic researcher from University of Washington. The author has contributed to research in topics: Health care & Quality of life (healthcare). The author has an hindex of 98, co-authored 398 publications receiving 48834 citations. Previous affiliations of Donald L. Patrick include Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center & University of Rochester.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Screening for depression in well older adults: Evaluation of a short form of the CES-D

TL;DR: A short form of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), derived and tested for reliability and validity among a sample of well older adults in a large Health Maintenance Organization, showed good predictive accuracy when compared to the full-length 20-item version.
Journal ArticleDOI

Measuring health-related quality of life.

TL;DR: Patients, clinicians, and health care administrators are all keenly interested in the effects of medical interventions on HRQL, because increasing efforts exist to incorporate HRQLs as measures of the quality of care and of clinical effectiveness, and because payers are beginning to use HRQL information in reimbursement decisions.
Journal ArticleDOI

The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes.

TL;DR: The aim was to clarify and standardize terminology and definitions of measurement properties by reaching consensus among a group of experts and to develop a taxonomy of measurement property relevant for evaluating health instruments.

Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review

TL;DR: In this paper, the SAC's current conceptualization of eight key attributes of health status and QoL instruments (i.e., conceptual and measurement model; reliability; validity; responsiveness; interpretability; respondent and administrative burden; alternate forms; and cultural and language adaptations) and the criteria by which instruments would be reviewed on each of those attributes are presented.