277
Views
132
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Half standard deviation estimate of the minimally important difference in HRQOL scores?

, &
Pages 515-523 | Published online: 09 Jan 2014

References

  • Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. I Clin. Epi 56, 395–407 (2003).
  • ••Provides a comprehensive overview of theconcept of clinically meaningful differences in health-related quality of life.
  • Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR. Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin. Proc.77, 371–383 (2002).
  • ••Reviews in detail the various methods that can be used to estimate clinically significant differences.
  • Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med. Care 41, 582–592 (2003).
  • ••Examines the existing literature andconcludes that the minimally important difference was close to a half standard deviation.
  • Hays RD, Hadorn D. Responsiveness to change: an aspect of validity, not a separate dimension. Qual. Life Res. 1, 73–75 (1992).
  • Kosinski M, Zhao SZ, Dedhiya S, Osterhaus JT, Ware JE. Determining the minimally important changes in generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 43, 1478–1487 (2000).
  • ••Uses five different anchors to estimate theminimally important differences for the SF-36 in a clinical trial of people with rheumatoid arthritis.
  • Beusterien KM, Nissenson AR, Port FK, Kelly M, Steinwald B, Ware JE. The effects of recombinant human erythropoietin on functional health and well being in chronic dialysis patients. j Am. Soc. Neph. 7, 763–773 (1996).
  • Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research: how meaningful is it? PharmacoEconomics 18, 419–423 (2000).
  • Cohen J. A power primer. Psycho]: Bull. 112,155–159 (1992).
  • Jones PW, Bosh TK. Quality of life changes in COPD patients treated with salmeterol. Am. I Resp. Crit. Care Mea'. 155, 1283–1289 (1997).
  • Bagenstose SE, Bernstein JA. Treatment of chronic rhinitis by an allergy specialist improves quality of life outcomes. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol 83,524–528 (1999).
  • Bestall JC, Paul EA, Garrod R, Garnham R, Joes PW, Wedzicha JA. Usefulness of the medical research council (MRC) dyspnoea scale as a measure of disability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 54,581–586 (1999).
  • Miller DM, Rudick RA, Cutter G, Baier M, Fischer JS. Clinical significance of the multiple sclerosis functional composite: relationship to patient-reported quality of life. Arch. Neurol 57,1319–1324 (2000).
  • Singh SJ, Sodergren SC, Hyland ME, Williams J, Morgan MDL. A comparison of three disease-specific and two generic health-status measures to evaluate the outcome of pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD. Resp. Med. 95,71–77(2001).
  • Talley NJ, Fullerton S, Junghard O, Wiklund I. Quality of life in patients with endoscopy-negative heartburn: reliability and sensitivity of disease-specific instruments. Am. j Gastroenterol 96, 1998–2004 (2001).
  • Cella DF, Bonomi AE, Lloyd SR, Tulsky DS, Kaplan E, Bonomi P. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) quality of life instrument. Lung Canwr12, 199–220 (1995).
  • Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K. Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qua]: Life Res. 11,207–221 (2002).
  • Wyrwich KW, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD. Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J. Clin. Epi. 52,861–873 (1999).
  • Wyrwich KW, Nienaber NA, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD. Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. Med. Care 37,469–478 (1999).
  • Redelmeier DA, Bayoumi AM, Goldstein RS, Guyatt GH. Interpreting small differences in functional status: the 6-minute walk test in chronic lung disease patients. Am. j Resp. Crit. Care Med. 155, 1278–1282 (1997).
  • Badia, X, Podzamczer D, Casado A, Lopez-Lavid C, Garcia M, Spanish MOS-HIV and MQOL-HIV Validation Group. Evaluating changes in health status in HIV-infected patients: Medical Outcomes Study-HIV and Multidimensional Quality of Life-HIV quality of life questionnaires. AIDS14,1439–1447 (2000).
  • Goldstein RS, Gort EH, Stubbing D, Avendano MA, Guyatt GH. Randomised controlled trial of respiratory rehabilitation. Lancet344, 1394–1397 (1994).
  • Jowett SL, Seal CJ, Barton R, Welfare MR. The short inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire is reliable and responsive to clinically important change in ulcerative colitis. Am.j Gastroenteml 96,2921–2928 (2001).
  • Osman LM, Godden DJ, Friend JAR, Legge JS, Douglas JG. Quality of life and hospital readmission in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax52, 67–71 (1997).
  • Bessette L, Sangha O, Kuntz K et al Comparative responsiveness of generic versus disease-specific and weighted versus unweighted health status measures in carpal tunnel syndrome. Med. Care. 36,491–502 (1998).
  • van Doorslaer E, Jones AM. Inequalities in self-reported health: validation of a new approach to measurement. I Health Econ. 22,61–87 (2003).
  • Drummond M. Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Ann. Med. 33(5), 344–349 (2001).
  • Fryback DG, Lawrence WF, Martin PA, Klein R, Klein BEK. Predicting Quality of Well-being scores from the SF-36: results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study. Med. Dec. Making / 7(1), 1–9 (1997).
  • Kaplan RM. The minimally clinically important difference in generic utility-based measures. Prepared for the workshop on minimally clinically important differences in COPD. Bel Harbor, FL, USA. January 11–13 (2004).
  • Pyne JM, Sullivan G, Kaplan R, Williams DK. Comparing the sensitivity of generic effectiveness measures with symptom improvement in persons with schizophrenia. Med. Cam 41 (2), 208–217 (2003).
  • Walters SJ, Brazier JE. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SP-6D. Health Qua]: Life Outcomes1(1), 4(2003).
  • King M, Dobson A. Estimating the responsiveness of an instrument using more than two repeated measures. Biometrics 56, 1197–1203 (2000).
  • Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann. Stat. 7,1–26 (1979).
  • Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RE Effect sizes for changes in health status. Med. Cam 27, S178—S189 (1989).
  • Fitzpatrick R, Ziebland S, Jenkinson C, Mowat A, Mowat A. Importance of sensitivity to change as a criterion for selecting health status measures. Qua]: Health Cam 1,89–93 (1992).
  • Wells GA, Tugwell P, Kraag GR, Baker PRA, Groh J, Redelmeier DA. Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective. j Rheumatol 20,557–566 (1997).
  • Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Ferrie PJ, Griffith LE, Townsend M. Measuring quality of life in children with asthma. Qual Life Res. 5,35–46 (1996).
  • Wijkstra PJ, Ten Vergert EM, van Altena R etal. Long-term benefits of rehabilitation at home on quality of life and exercise tolerance in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 50, 824–828 (1995).
  • Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. j Clin. Epidemiol 47, 81–87 (1994).
  • Guell R, Casan P, Sangenis M, Morante F, Belda J, Guyatt GH. Quality of life in patients with chronic respiratory disease: the Spanish version of the chronic respiratory questionnaire. Eur. Respir.J11, 55–60 (1998).
  • Patrick DL, Martin ML, Bushnell DM, Yalcin L, Wagner TH, Buesching DR Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I- Q O L) . Urology 53,71–76 (1999).
  • Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, Williams GR, Lipscomb J, Matchar D. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the health utilities index mark II. PharmacoEconomics 15,141–155 (1999).
  • Santanello NC, Zhang J, Seidenber B, Reiss TF, Barber BL. What are minimal important changes for asthma measures in a clinical trial? Eur. Resp. J 14,23–27 (1999).
  • Troosters T, Gosselink R, Decramer M. Short- and long-term effects of outpatient rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial. Am. J Med. 109, 207–212 (2000).
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimally clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Care Res. 45,384-391 (2001).
  • Segal R, Evans W, Johnson D et al. Structured exercise improves physical functioning in women with states I and II breast cancer: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Clih. Oncol. 19, 657–665 (2001).
  • Cella D, Eton DT, Fairclough DL et al. What is a clinically meaningful change on the functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung (FACT-L) questionnaire? results from eastern co-operative oncology group (ECOG) study 5592. J Clin. Epidemiol. 37, 469–478 (2002).
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Michel BA et al. Minimal clinically important rehabilitation effects in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. J Rheumatol. 29, 131–138 (2002).
  • Wise EA. Methods for analyzing psychotherapy outcomes: a review of clinical significance, reliable change, and recommendations for future directions. J. Pers. Assess. 82,50–59 (2004).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.