Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
WP 2.2. Depression Assessment and classification
2
Major aims WP 2.2 Overall: To improve assessment and classification of depression by computer assisted approach Sub-objectives: To define depression in palliative care To determine the optimal set of items to classify and assess depression in palliative care To develop a computer-based pilot version for classification and assessment in palliative care
3
WP 2.2 - the milestones No DueSpecifications D2.2.1Month 9-Systematic literature rev. -Incl. experts’ opinions D2.2.2 Month 9-Protocol for data collection Month 12-Approval from ethical committees obtained D2.2.3 Month 24-Data collection finalized D2.2.4 Month 30-Selected the set of items for diagnosis of depression -Software for computer ass. D2.2.5Month 36-Final report
4
WP 2.2 – where are we now? 8 months’ delay winter 2007 Personnel not available at start WP-leader changed position Research group operative august 2007 Post–doc research fellow 80% PhD-research fellow 100% for 6 months Main effort autumn 2007 Preparation for literature search on tools Good news – protocol, schemes, workplan etc. finalized Literature search starts now
5
Challenges WP 2.2 so far Lack of personnel Too ambitious time-line in proposal Group not operative at start for the EPCRC-project i.e. 8 months to find and employ post-doc research fellow Trivialities –Time-consuming to become operative even with personnel in place Coordination with other WP-groups WP 2.1 WP 3.2 including common expert groups
6
Aspirations for this EPCRC meeting Discussions with other WP’s 2.1.& 3.2 Status, shared aspects of EPCRC Discuss common challenges Methodological Materials Finalise discussion on expert group Depression – WP 3.2 Start preparatory discussions on data collection
7
One finding so far – What is a palliative care population? Descriptions of palliative cancer patient samples According to disease status: –Non-curative patients. Inclusion criteria involve to be “newly admitted to undergo first-line chemotherapy” (Wedding et al. 2007) –Patients referred to Palliative day care. No information regarding e.g. length of survival (Lloyd-Williams, 2002) –Patients with recurrent gynaecologic malignancies receiving chemotherapy (von Gruenigen, 2006) –In general, survival time or expected time to live is seldom reported
8
One finding so far – What is a palliative care population? II According to heterogeneity of the sample: –Non-curative and curative (Wedding et al. 2007) –Cancer and non-cancer (Ewing 2004) –Curative patients, patients receiving palliative chemotherapy or palliative radiotherapy, and patients in palliative care not receiving anti-cancer treatment (Salminen 2007) The palliative phase shorter due to prolonged oncological treatment How to define the palliative population –Of lesser relevance in WP2.2 –What about the WP 3’s?
9
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Sample size Age Gender Performance status Previous history of depression Current anti-depressant medication Amount of patients with cancer within the sample Amount of palliative cancer patients within the cancer sample Clear definition of the palliative cancer sample: Should contain more information than e.g. “non-curative” Status: Inpatient, Outpatient, Both Survival time from baseline to death Expected time to live from baseline From WP2.2 Extraction Sheet: Sample Description
10
Next steps Modification of DSMIV criteria – needed? How to use or modify existing criteria – guideline Expert group – methodology as in other WPs Standardized interviews – for research Which are available – guideline? Expert group – methodology as for other symptoms Assessment & screening Collect items – as described in protocol Must probably expand beyond PM Screening – a need for guideline? 2 items form QLQ C30 (Groenvold et al 2004)?
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.