Literature DB >> 11758292

Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures. Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example.

H C de Vet1, L M Bouter, P D Bezemer, A J Beurskens.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This article outlines basic methods for quantifying reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures.
METHODS: The background noise in stable patients provides the desired information to quantify the reproducibility. From this, the smallest real difference (SRD) for longitudinal differences can be derived. We propose to use the SRD to define responsiveness: from all patients who change according to an external criterion, we take the percentage that changes at least SRD on the outcome measure. A more complete picture of the responsiveness of the outcome measure arises when the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) is constructed, corresponding to all possible cut-off change scores. The proposed methods are illustrated with an empirical example.
RESULTS: In the illustration the methods appeared to be very useful and complemented each other. We could evaluate whether the observed change score was larger than that expected due to chance. With the methods it was possible to evaluate both the ability of an instrument to detect change if there is a real change in health status (sensitivity to change) and the ability to detect absence of change if there is no real change (specificity to change).
CONCLUSION: We presented the use of SRDs and ROC curves for quantifying reproducibility and responsiveness. We started with the basic notions and arrived at methods that are both understandable and useful.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11758292

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  57 in total

1.  A comparison of responsiveness indices in multiple sclerosis patients.

Authors:  L E Pfennings; H M van der Ploeg; L Cohen; C H Polman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  The Maastricht social participation profile: development and clinimetric properties in older adults with a chronic physical illness.

Authors:  Godelief M J Mars; Gertrudis I J M Kempen; Marcel W M Post; Ireen M Proot; Ilse Mesters; Jacques T M van Eijk
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-09-21       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Danish version of the Oswestry disability index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: Sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations.

Authors:  Henrik Hein Lauridsen; Jan Hartvigsen; Claus Manniche; Lars Korsholm; Niels Grunnet-Nilsson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Concurrent comparison of the measurement properties of generic and disease-specific questionnaires in obese inpatients.

Authors:  A Sartorio; F Agosti; A De Col; G Castelnuovo; G M Manzoni; E Molinari; F M Impellizzeri
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 4.256

5.  Safe lifting in patients with chronic low back pain: comparing FCE lifting task and Niosh lifting guideline.

Authors:  Wietske Kuijer; Pieter U Dijkstra; Sandra Brouwer; Michiel F Reneman; Johan W Groothoff; Jan H B Geertzen
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2006-12

6.  Development and psychometric properties of the Maastricht Personal Autonomy Questionnaire (MPAQ) in older adults with a chronic physical illness.

Authors:  Godelief M J Mars; Jacques Th M van Eijk; Marcel W M Post; Ireen M Proot; Ilse Mesters; Gertrudis I J M Kempen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 7.  [Objectifying results in total knee arthroplasty: Is "patient satisfaction" adequate].

Authors:  C Kopkow; J Schmitt; E Haase; T Lange; K-P Günther; J Lützner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  Validity and repeatability of inertial measurement units for measuring gait parameters.

Authors:  Edward P Washabaugh; Tarun Kalyanaraman; Peter G Adamczyk; Edward S Claflin; Chandramouli Krishnan
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 2.840

9.  Understanding Ferguson's delta: time to say good-bye?

Authors:  Berend Terluin; Dirk L Knol; Caroline B Terwee; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Estimating the number needed to treat from continuous outcomes in randomised controlled trials: methodological challenges and worked example using data from the UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (BEAM) trial.

Authors:  Robert Froud; Sandra Eldridge; Ranjit Lall; Martin Underwood
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.