PURPOSE: To estimate the minimal clinically meaningful improvement (MCMI) on the Self-Esteem And Relationship (SEAR) questionnaire. METHODS: Using combined data from the 2 pivotal SEAR trials of men treated with sildenafil for erectile dysfunction (ED), MCMIs were estimated as the lower limit of the 2-sided 95% confidence intervals of SEAR mean change scores (from baseline to end of study) for 2 anchor groups: (1) men who improved 1 ED severity category on the Erectile Function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function, and (2) men who improved 5-60% (inclusive) on these erectile function scores. RESULTS: Both anchors gave comparable results. A 10-point MCMI was proposed because the estimates of 95% lower bounds centered on around 10 points for most SEAR components (Sexual Relationship, Confidence, Self-Esteem, Overall Score). An exception was the Overall Relationship whose 95% lower bounds were too low to recommend them as an MCMI. CONCLUSIONS: Two anchor-based approaches suggest that a change of about 10 points represents an MCMI on most components of the SEAR questionnaire.
PURPOSE: To estimate the minimal clinically meaningful improvement (MCMI) on the Self-Esteem And Relationship (SEAR) questionnaire. METHODS: Using combined data from the 2 pivotal SEAR trials of men treated with sildenafil for erectile dysfunction (ED), MCMIs were estimated as the lower limit of the 2-sided 95% confidence intervals of SEAR mean change scores (from baseline to end of study) for 2 anchor groups: (1) men who improved 1 ED severity category on the Erectile Function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function, and (2) men who improved 5-60% (inclusive) on these erectile function scores. RESULTS: Both anchors gave comparable results. A 10-point MCMI was proposed because the estimates of 95% lower bounds centered on around 10 points for most SEAR components (Sexual Relationship, Confidence, Self-Esteem, Overall Score). An exception was the Overall Relationship whose 95% lower bounds were too low to recommend them as an MCMI. CONCLUSIONS: Two anchor-based approaches suggest that a change of about 10 points represents an MCMI on most components of the SEAR questionnaire.
Authors: Stanley E Althof; Michael P O'leary; Joseph C Cappelleri; Kyle Hvidsten; Vera J Stecher; Sidney Glina; Rosie King; Richard L Siegel Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: David Cella; David T Eton; Diane L Fairclough; Philip Bonomi; Anne E Heyes; Cheryl Silberman; Michael K Wolf; David H Johnson Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Michael P O'Leary; Stanley E Althof; Joseph C Cappelleri; Arthur Crowley; Nancy Sherman; Sandeep Duttagupta Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jim Z Li; Terence A Maguire; Kelly H Zou; Lauren J Lee; Shaantanu S Donde; David G Taylor Journal: Int J Clin Pract Date: 2022-03-20 Impact factor: 3.149
Authors: Lauren J Lee; Terence A Maguire; Martine C Maculaitis; Birol Emir; Vicky W Li; Mara Jeffress; Jim Z Li; Kelly H Zou; Shaantanu S Donde; David Taylor Journal: Int J Clin Pract Date: 2020-12-05 Impact factor: 2.503