Literature DB >> 17551850

Validity of patient-reported health-related quality of life global ratings of change using structural equation modeling.

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

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient-perceived global ratings of change are often used as anchors of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) since they are easy for clinicians to interpret and incorporate the patient's perception of change as a means to capture clinical significance. Although this approach may be preferred, the validity of the anchor-based approach is currently under scrutiny.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the explained variation in single-item domain-specific global ratings of change (GRCs) that is accounted for by time 1 (T1) and time 2 (T2) domain-specific summary change scores from the Short-Form 36, V2 (SF-36) Health Survey in asthma primary care patients.
METHODS: The baseline and first follow-up enrollment data to be evaluated in this investigation were part of a larger longitudinal HRQoL study conducted from August 2000-December 2002, in which the 356 asthma patients from Midwestern primary care facilities completed telephone interviews for every two consecutive months for a year on multiple HRQoL measures, including the SF-36 and domain-specific GRCs. A structural equation modeling technique was employed to ascertain the explained variability in patient-reported GRCs for each SF-36 domain that is accounted for by the summary change scores at the two time-points for four SF-36 domains (bodily pain, general health perception, mental health, and physical functioning). The model was estimated by the maximum likelihood method with the Satorra-Bentler correction for ordinal variables using equal threshold asymptotic covariance matrices.
RESULTS: Multicollinearity between T1 and T2 latent constructs clouded interpretation of the standardized structural coefficients leading to GRCs. Correlations, however, revealed that all four domain-specific GRCs were more strongly related to T2- than T1-domain summary scores, indicating that patients were not equally relying on T1 and T2 to generate the GRCs. Furthermore, T1-domain summary scores were not of equal magnitude and opposite sign as compared to T2 scores.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, there is insufficient evidence to establish SF-36 domain-specific GRC validity in asthma primary care patients. Therefore, it is recommended to reassess validity before using domain-specific SF-36 GRCs to classify clinically important change over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17551850     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9225-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  21 in total

1.  Do we know what global ratings of health-related quality of life measure?

Authors:  B Mozes; Y Maor; A Shmueli
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Ross D Crosby; Ronette L Kolotkin; G Rhys Williams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  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

4.  Structural equation modeling and its relationship to multiple regression and factor analysis.

Authors:  C M Musil; S L Jones; C D Warner
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.228

5.  Capturing the patient's view of change as a clinical outcome measure.

Authors:  D Fischer; A L Stewart; D A Bloch; K Lorig; D Laurent; H Holman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999 Sep 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review.

Authors:  J Greenhalgh; K Meadows
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.431

7.  Symptoms, quality of life, and health service contact among young adults with mild asthma.

Authors:  L M Osman; C Calder; R Robertson; J A Friend; J S Legge; J G Douglas
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 8.  Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; David Osoba; Albert W Wu; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Geoffrey R Norman
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.616

9.  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

10.  Measuring change over time: a comparison of results from a global single item of health status and the multi-dimensional SF-36 health status survey questionnaire in patients presenting with menorrhagia.

Authors:  C Jenkinson; V Peto; A Coulter
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  9 in total

1.  Idio Scale Judgment: evaluation of a new method for estimating responder thresholds.

Authors:  Karon F Cook; Michael A Kallen; Cheryl D Coon; David Victorson; Deborah M Miller
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Methods for interpreting change over time in patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  K W Wyrwich; J M Norquist; W R Lenderking; S Acaster
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Domain-specific transition questions demonstrated higher validity than global transition questions as anchors for clinically important improvement.

Authors:  Michael M Ward; Lori C Guthrie; Maria Alba
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  The minimum important difference for the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form in women with stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Larry T Sirls; Sharon Tennstedt; Linda Brubaker; Hae-Young Kim; Ingrid Nygaard; David D Rahn; Jonathan Shepherd; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2013-11-23       Impact factor: 2.696

5.  Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of low-intensity physical activity for frail older adults: Promoting seniors' health with home care aides (Pro-Home).

Authors:  Naoko Muramatsu; Lijuan Yin; Michael L Berbaum; David X Marquez; Surrey M Walton; Maria Caceres; Katya Y Cruz Madrid; Joseph P Zanoni
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Testing the construct validity of a health transition question using vignette-guided patient ratings of health.

Authors:  Michael M Ward; Jinxiang Hu; Lori C Guthrie; Maria Alba
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.186

7.  High-dose versus standard-dose amoxicillin/clavulanate for clinically-diagnosed acute bacterial sinusitis: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Andrea Matho; Mary Mulqueen; Miyuki Tanino; Aaron Quidort; Jesse Cheung; Jennifer Pollard; Julieta Rodriguez; Supraja Swamy; Brittany Tayler; Gina Garrison; Ashar Ata; Paul Sorum
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Establishing Minimal Important Differences for the VR-12 and SANE Scores in Patients Following Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears.

Authors:  Lingjie Zhou; Madhuri Natarajan; Bruce S Miller; Joel J Gagnier
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-07-26

9.  The minimal perceived change: a formal model of the responder definition according to the patient's meaning of change for patient-reported outcome data analysis and interpretation.

Authors:  Antoine Vanier; Véronique Sébille; Myriam Blanchin; Jean-Benoit Hardouin
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 4.615

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.