ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

杜克活动状态指数 (DASI)×明尼苏达心力衰竭生活质量问卷 (MLHFQ)×
领域心脏病学心脏病学
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份19891987
提出者Mark A. HlatkyTimothy S. Rector
类型Self-report questionnaireSelf-report questionnaire
开创性文献Hlatky, M. A., Boineau, R. E., Higginbotham, M. B., Lee, K. L., Mark, D. B., Califf, R. M., Cobb, F. R., & Pryor, D. B. (1989). A brief self-administered questionnaire to determine functional capacity (The Duke Activity Status Index). American Journal of Cardiology, 64(10), 651–654. DOI ↗Rector, T. S., Kubo, S. H., & Cohn, J. N. (1987). Patients' self-assessment of their congestive heart failure. Part 2: Content, reliability and responsiveness of a new measure, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Heart Failure, 3(5), 198–209. link ↗
别名DASIMLHFQ
相关44
摘要The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) is a 12-item self-report questionnaire that estimates functional capacity—the maximum oxygen consumption (VO2 max) a patient can achieve—based on their ability to perform common daily activities. Developed by Hlatky and colleagues in 1989, the DASI provides a non-invasive assessment of exercise tolerance and cardiovascular fitness equivalent to formal exercise stress testing, making it invaluable for risk stratification, treatment planning, and prognosis in cardiac and pulmonary populations.The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is a 21-item self-report measure that quantifies the multidimensional burden of heart failure on patients' daily living and quality of life. Developed by Rector, Kubo, and Cohn in 1987, the MLHFQ is the most widely used disease-specific QoL instrument in heart failure research and clinical practice, valued for its brevity, sensitivity to treatment response, and predictive value for prognosis.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 1 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Duke Activity Status Index · Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. 于 2026-06-20 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare