Literature DB >> 15851771

Evaluating the statistical significance of health-related quality-of-life change in individual patients.

Ron D Hays1, Marc Brodsky, M Francis Johnston, Karen L Spritzer, Ka-Kit Hui.   

Abstract

Assessing individual change is feasible and potentially useful in clinical practice. This article provides an overview of the evaluation of statistically significant change in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for individual patients. We review the standard error of measurement, standard error of prediction, and reliable change indices using a sample of 54 patients receiving care at the UCLA Center for East-West Medicine. The largest amount of change necessary for statistical significance was found for the reliable change index and the smallest change was needed for the standard error of measurement. The amount of change required for statistical significance was intermediate for the standard error of prediction. The median kappa for classifying change (declined, stayed the same, improved) by different indices was .82, indicating a high level of agreement. Future research is needed to determine if one index is most appropriate for evaluating the significance of individual change.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15851771     DOI: 10.1177/0163278705275339

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eval Health Prof        ISSN: 0163-2787            Impact factor:   2.651


  40 in total

Review 1.  Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: expressing and interpreting associations and effect sizes in clinical outcome assessments.

Authors:  Lori D McLeod; Joseph C Cappelleri; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 7.045

2.  Agreement about identifying patients who change over time: cautionary results in cataract and heart failure patients.

Authors:  David Feeny; Karen Spritzer; Ron D Hays; Honghu Liu; Theodore G Ganiats; Robert M Kaplan; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Measuring clinically meaningful change following mental health treatment.

Authors:  Susan V Eisen; Gayatri Ranganathan; Pradipta Seal; Avron Spiro
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 1.505

Review 4.  Modifying measures based on differential item functioning (DIF) impact analyses.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Mildred Ramirez; Richard N Jones; Seung Choi; Paul K Crane
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2012-03-15

5.  Minimally important differences of the UCLA Scleroderma Clinical Trial Consortium Gastrointestinal Tract Instrument.

Authors:  Dinesh Khanna; Daniel E Furst; Paul Maranian; James R Seibold; Ann Impens; Maureen D Mayes; Philip J Clements; Terri Getzug; Ron D Hays
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 4.666

6.  Linking Scores with Patient-Reported Health Outcome Instruments: A Validation Study and Comparison of Three Linking Methods.

Authors:  Benjamin D Schalet; Sangdon Lim; David Cella; Seung W Choi
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  Patient-reported outcomes and the mandate of measurement.

Authors:  Gary Donaldson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-10-25       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach.

Authors:  Henrica C W de Vet; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Caroline B Terwee; Nicole van der Roer; Dirk L Knol; Heleen Beckerman; Maarten Boers; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-10-11       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 9.  Conceptual and Analytical Considerations toward the Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Personalized Medicine.

Authors:  Demissie Alemayehu; Joseph C Cappelleri
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2012-07

10.  Evidence-based effect size estimation: an illustration using the case of acupuncture for cancer-related fatigue.

Authors:  Michael F Johnston; Ron D Hays; Ka-Kit Hui
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 3.659

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.