Our findings suggest the larger the present preference comparison gap, the greater the depression.
While the preference comparison gap of the past did not change over time with the decrease of depression, there was a trend for the future preference comparison gap that might become statistically significant with a larger sample size.
Change in depression or hopelessness was important in reducing the preference comparison gap for present and future QoL assessments.
However, depression was more highly associated with the present and future preference comparison gap at three months.
An achievable target may be to keep the same preference comparison gap between and over time points to maintain a healthy homeostasis and a good QoL (figure 2).
In contrast, hopelessness was consistently correlated with the preference comparison future gaps and only at baseline with the gap of present actual/aspirational QoL.
First the preference comparison gaps were assessed, i.e. where patients perceive themselves to be and where they wish to be.
This is accomplished by creating groups of participants who receive the same treatment randomly or by preference; comparison of these groups indicates the contribution of treatment preferences to attrition, adherence and outcomes.
Correlations between the preference comparison QoL gaps for present, past and future assessments with the severity of depression (d) showed significant high correlations for the present (p) and future (f) gap at baseline (1) and three months (2) (rfd1 =.468, rfd1 =.475, both p <.05, rpd2 =.815, rfd2 =.730, both p <.01).
In addition, correlations between the QoL preference comparison gaps for present, past and future assessment and hopelessness (h) were statistically significant at baseline for the present (p) gap and at three months (2) for present (p) and future (f) gaps (rph1 =.567, rph2 =.586, rfh2 =.422, all p <.05).
