BACKGROUND: Demonstration of adequate reliability and validity is sufficient for concluding that an instrument is applicable for descriptive and predictive purposes, but before we can confidently use an outcome measure in clinical trials, the responsiveness (synonymous with sensitivity to change) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) should be known. With this study, we aimed to assess responsiveness and MCID of four outcome measures used in atopic eczema: the Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), the objective SCORAD, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), and the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). METHODS: Data of three randomized controlled trials were used. To demonstrate responsiveness, we plotted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. MCID was estimated using mean change scores of patients that showed a relevant improvement. Bland and Altman methods were used to quantify the limits of agreement. RESULTS: Area under the ROC curve for the SCORAD was 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.78], for the objective SCORAD, 0.73 (95% CI: 0.70-0.77), for the EASI, 0.67 (95% CI: 0.60-0.76), and for the POEM, 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.75). Scores above 0.70 represent a fair responsiveness. The MCID was 8.7 points for the SCORAD, 8.2 for the objective SCORAD, 6.6 for the EASI, and 3.4 for the POEM. CONCLUSION: The objective SCORAD and SCORAD showed a fair responsiveness. The MCIDs are an important prerequisite for the interpretation of published eczema trials and for the planning/sample size estimation of future trials.
BACKGROUND: Demonstration of adequate reliability and validity is sufficient for concluding that an instrument is applicable for descriptive and predictive purposes, but before we can confidently use an outcome measure in clinical trials, the responsiveness (synonymous with sensitivity to change) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) should be known. With this study, we aimed to assess responsiveness and MCID of four outcome measures used in atopic eczema: the Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), the objective SCORAD, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), and the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). METHODS: Data of three randomized controlled trials were used. To demonstrate responsiveness, we plotted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. MCID was estimated using mean change scores of patients that showed a relevant improvement. Bland and Altman methods were used to quantify the limits of agreement. RESULTS: Area under the ROC curve for the SCORAD was 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.78], for the objective SCORAD, 0.73 (95% CI: 0.70-0.77), for the EASI, 0.67 (95% CI: 0.60-0.76), and for the POEM, 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.75). Scores above 0.70 represent a fair responsiveness. The MCID was 8.7 points for the SCORAD, 8.2 for the objective SCORAD, 6.6 for the EASI, and 3.4 for the POEM. CONCLUSION: The objective SCORAD and SCORAD showed a fair responsiveness. The MCIDs are an important prerequisite for the interpretation of published eczema trials and for the planning/sample size estimation of future trials.
Authors: Jennifer C Li; Anna Fishbein; Vivek Singam; Kevin R Patel; Phyllis C Zee; Hrayr Attarian; David Cella; Jonathan I Silverberg Journal: Dermatitis Date: 2018 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 4.845
Authors: Sjors A Koppes; Richard Brans; Suzana Ljubojevic Hadzavdic; Monique H W Frings-Dresen; Thomas Rustemeyer; Sanja Kezic Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 2.749
Authors: Nick A Francis; Matthew J Ridd; Emma Thomas-Jones; Christopher C Butler; Kerenza Hood; Victoria Shepherd; Charis A Marwick; Chao Huang; Mirella Longo; Mandy Wootton; Frank Sullivan Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Lawrence F Eichenfield; Wynnis L Tom; Sarah L Chamlin; Steven R Feldman; Jon M Hanifin; Eric L Simpson; Timothy G Berger; James N Bergman; David E Cohen; Kevin D Cooper; Kelly M Cordoro; Dawn M Davis; Alfons Krol; David J Margolis; Amy S Paller; Kathryn Schwarzenberger; Robert A Silverman; Hywel C Williams; Craig A Elmets; Julie Block; Christopher G Harrod; Wendy Smith Begolka; Robert Sidbury Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: K R Patel; V Singam; P P Vakharia; R Chopra; R Sacotte; N Patel; S Immaneni; R Kantor; D Y Hsu; J I Silverberg Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Steven J Ersser; Fiona Cowdell; Sue Latter; Eric Gardiner; Carsten Flohr; Andrew Robert Thompson; Karina Jackson; Helen Farasat; Fiona Ware; Alison Drury Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-01-07
Authors: J I Silverberg; D Lei; M Yousaf; S R Janmohamed; P P Vakharia; R Chopra; R Chavda; S Gabriel; K R Patel; V Singam; R Kantor; D Y Hsu Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Trisha Kaundinya; Uros Rakita; Armaan Guraya; Donna Maria Abboud; Emily Croce; Jacob P Thyssen; Andrew Alexis; Jonathan I Silverberg Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 8.551