Literature DB >> 2646488

Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.

L E Kazis1, J J Anderson, R F Meenan.   

Abstract

Health status measures are being used with increasing frequency in clinical research. Up to now the emphasis has been on the reliability and validity of these measures. Less attention has been given to the sensitivity of these measures for detecting clinical change. As health status measures are applied more frequently in the clinical setting, we need a useful way to estimate and communicate whether particular changes in health status are clinically relevant. This report considers effect sizes as a useful way to interpret changes in health status. Effect sizes are defined as the mean change found in a variable divided by the standard deviation of that variable. Effect sizes are used to translate "the before and after changes" in a "one group" situation into a standard unit of measurement that will provide a clearer understanding of health status results. The utility of effect sizes is demonstrated from four different perspectives using three health status data sets derived from arthritis populations administered the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS). The first perspective shows how general and instrument-specific benchmarks can be developed and how they can be used to translate the meaning of clinical change. The second perspective shows how effect sizes can be used to compare traditional clinical measures with health status measures in a standard clinical drug trial. The third application demonstrates the use of effect sizes when comparing two drugs tested in separate drug trials and shows how they can facilitate this type of comparison. Finally, our health status results show how effect sizes can supplement standard statistical testing to give a more complete and clinically relevant picture of health status change. We conclude that effect sizes are an important tool that will facilitate the use and interpretation of health status measures in clinical research in arthritis and other chronic diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2646488     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-198903001-00015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  537 in total

1.  Contrasting evidence of the effectiveness of cosmetic surgery from two health related quality of life measures.

Authors:  A Klassen; R Fitzpatrick; C Jenkinson; T Goodacre
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  Subjective outcome measurement--a primer.

Authors:  M P Tully; J A Cantrill
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  1999-06

3.  A comparison of responsiveness indices in multiple sclerosis patients.

Authors:  L E Pfennings; H M van der Ploeg; L Cohen; C H Polman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Sample size calculations in studies using the EuroQol 5D.

Authors:  M Roset; X Badia; N E Mayo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  A comparison of four quality of life instruments in cardiac patients: SF-36, QLI, QLMI, and SEIQoL.

Authors:  H J Smith; R Taylor; A Mitchell
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 6.  Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II.

Authors:  G Samsa; D Edelman; M L Rothman; G R Williams; J Lipscomb; D Matchar
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Measuring symptomatic and functional recovery in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  J P Metlay; M J Fine; R Schulz; T J Marrie; C M Coley; W N Kapoor; D E Singer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 9.  Tricyclic and Tetracyclic Antidepressants for the Prevention of Frequent Episodic or Chronic Tension-Type Headache in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Jackson; Josephine M Mancuso; Sarah Nickoloff; Rebecca Bernstein; Cynthia Kay
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Mexiletine for treatment of myotonia: a trial triumph for rare disease networks.

Authors:  Eric P Hoffman; Henry J Kaminski
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 56.272

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.