Literature DB >> 17036255

A comparison of traditional and Rasch cut points for assessing clinically important change in health-related quality of life among patients with asthma.

Stacie M Metz1, Kathleen W Wyrwich, Ajit N Babu, Kurt Kroenke, William M Tierney, Fredric D Wolinsky.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient-perceived change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) domains has often been classified using a 15-point patient transition rating scale. However, traditional change levels of trivial ( - 1, 0, or 1), minimal (2, 3 or - 2, - 3), moderate (4, 5 or - 4, - 5) and large (6, 7 or - 6, - 7) on this scale have been arbitrarily defined and originally assumed that change related to an improvement was the same as that for a decline.
OBJECTIVE: To compare traditional and Rasch partial credit model-derived cut points and the mean changes for each change categorization when assessing clinically important change in asthma-specific HRQoL.
METHODS: Our sample included 396 asthmatic outpatients who completed bimonthly telephone interviews on the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and transition rating items over 1 year of participation. We employed item response theory in a novel approach to identify cut points on domain-specific HRQoL change data and transition ratings. After determining natural cut points for minimal, moderate, and large differences on the transition rating anchor, we calculated mean changes under change categorizations for both improvements and declines for the two transition rating classification approaches.
RESULTS: Although traditional and Rasch categorizations for small, moderate, and large changes slightly differed and displayed a lack of symmetry between improvements and declines, nearly all mean changes between classification approaches were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, traditional transition rating cut points remain suitable to assess HRQoL clinical significance in outpatients with asthma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17036255     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-006-0036-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   3.440


  21 in total

1.  9-11, personal stress, mental health, and sense of control among older adults.

Authors:  Fredric D Wolinsky; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Kurt Kroenke; Ajit N Babu; William M Tierney
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.077

2.  Hi! How are you? Response shift, implicit theories and differing epistemologies.

Authors:  Geoffrey Norman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Test-retest reliability of the Mirowsky-Ross 2 x 2 Index of the Sense of Control.

Authors:  Fredric D Wolinsky; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Stacie M Metz; Ajit N Babu; William M Tierney; Kurt Kroenke
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  2004-04

4.  The use of quality of life data in clinical practice.

Authors:  J Morris; D Perez; B McNoe
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Relation of distribution- and anchor-based approaches in interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G R Norman; F G Sridhar; G H Guyatt; S D Walter
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Development and testing of a new measure of health status for clinical trials in heart failure.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; S Nogradi; S Halcrow; J Singer; M J Sullivan; E L Fallen
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening.

Authors:  David Cella; Elizabeth A Hahn; Kelly Dineen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Rasch fit statistics as a test of the invariance of item parameter estimates.

Authors:  Richard M Smith; Kyunghee K Suh
Journal:  J Appl Meas       Date:  2003

9.  A critical look at transition ratings.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Geoffrey R Norman; Elizabeth F Juniper; Lauren E Griffith
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 10.  Clinically important differences in health-related quality of life for patients with asthma: an expert consensus panel report.

Authors:  Kathleen W Wyrwich; Harold S Nelson; William M Tierney; Ajit N Babu; Kurt Kroenke; Fredric D Wolinsky
Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.347

View more
  6 in total

1.  Development of a computerized adaptive test to assess health-related quality of life in adults with asthma.

Authors:  Diane M Turner-Bowker; Michael A DeRosa; Renee N Saris-Baglama; Jakob B Bjorner
Journal:  J Asthma       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.515

2.  Psychometric evaluation of the WHOQOL-BREF in community-dwelling older people in Taiwan using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Wen-Miin Liang; Chih-Hung Chang; Yi-Chun Yeh; Haw-Yaw Shy; Hung-Wei Chen; Mau-Roung Lin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-04-02       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 3.  Methods for specifying the target difference in a randomised controlled trial: the Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) systematic review.

Authors:  Jenni Hislop; Temitope E Adewuyi; Luke D Vale; Kirsten Harrild; Cynthia Fraser; Tara Gurung; Douglas G Altman; Andrew H Briggs; Peter Fayers; Craig R Ramsay; John D Norrie; Ian M Harvey; Brian Buckley; Jonathan A Cook
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 11.069

4.  Item response theory analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Health-Related Quality of Life (CDC HRQOL) items in adults with arthritis.

Authors:  Thelma J Mielenz; Leigh F Callahan; Michael C Edwards
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 3.186

5.  Psychometric evaluation of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-PR25 for HRQOL assessment in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Yu-Jun Chang; Wen-Miin Liang; Hsi-Chin Wu; Hsueh-Chun Lin; Jong-Yi Wang; Tsai-Chung Li; Yi-Chun Yeh; Chih-Hung Chang
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2012-08-20       Impact factor: 3.186

6.  Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer.

Authors:  A Simon Pickard; Maureen P Neary; David Cella
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 3.186

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.