Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)

OPAC HELP

Titolo:
How to validate clinically important change in health-related functional status. Is the magnitude of the effect size consistently related to magnitude of change as indicated by a global question rating?
Autore:
Middel, B; Stewart, R; Bouma, J; van Sonderen, E; van den Heuvel, WJA;
Indirizzi:
Univ Groningen, Sch Med, No Ctr Healthcare Res, NL-9713 AV Groningen, Netherlands Univ Groningen Groningen Netherlands NL-9713 AV V Groningen, Netherlands
Titolo Testata:
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
fascicolo: 4, volume: 7, anno: 2001,
pagine: 399 - 410
SICI:
1356-1294(200111)7:4<399:HTVCIC>2.0.ZU;2-M
Fonte:
ISI
Lingua:
ENG
Soggetto:
QUALITY-OF-LIFE; CARPAL-TUNNEL SYNDROME; HEART-FAILURE; COMPARATIVE RESPONSIVENESS; DISABILITY QUESTIONNAIRE; RHEUMATOID-ARTHRITIS; STATUS INSTRUMENTS; EORTC QLQ-C30; PATIENT; DISEASE;
Keywords:
adult; clinically relevant change; health status indicators; heart failure; prospective studies; questionnaires; stratified effect size; treatment outcome;
Tipo documento:
Article
Natura:
Periodico
Settore Disciplinare:
Clinical Medicine
Citazioni:
49
Recensione:
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: Middel, B Univ Groningen, Sch Med, No Ctr Healthcare Res, A Deusinglaan 1,NL-9713 AV Groningen, Netherlands Univ Groningen A Deusinglaan 1 Groningen Netherlands NL-9713 AV
Citazione:
B. Middel et al., "How to validate clinically important change in health-related functional status. Is the magnitude of the effect size consistently related to magnitude of change as indicated by a global question rating?", J EVAL CL P, 7(4), 2001, pp. 399-410

Abstract

Some clinical trials perform repeated measurement over time and estimate clinically relevant change in an instrument's score with global ratings of perceived change or so-called transition questions. The conceptual and methodological difficulties in estimating the magnitude of clinically relevant change over time in health-related functional status (HRFS) are discussed. This paper investigates the concordance between the amount of serially assessed change with effect size estimates (the researcher's perspective) and global ratings of perceived change (the patient's perspective). A total of 217 patients who were scheduled for diagnostic examination were included, andthe Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, extended with MOS-20 items, was assessed before and after medical intervention (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, coronary artery bypass grafting or pharmaco-therapy). Global questions were applied to assess perceived change over time for every item from domains of physical and emotional functioning and used as the external criterion of relevant change in the analysis of items. Global questions corresponding with overall change in these domains were used in the comparison of change in physical and emotional functioning scales. Two effect size indices were used: (i) ES (mean change/SDpooled) and (ii) ES (mean change/SDchange). A method is described to calculate a value indicating the extent of discordance between the researcher's interpretation of magnitude of change and the external criterion (the patient's perspective). Findings suggest that effect size (ES) (mean change/SDpooled) was in keeping with the magnitude of change indicated by patients' judgements, or their category of subjective meaning, for all scales. Furthermore, in cases inwhich the magnitude of change estimated with the SRM (mean change/SDchange) was not confirmed empirically by the external criterion ratings, the discordance could be interpreted as a trivial discordance.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 21/01/20 alle ore 06:58:03