Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 8 , Pages 865-874, August 2010

Mathematical coupling may account for the association between baseline severity and minimally important difference values

Health Services Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Accepted 23 October 2009. published online 22 February 2010.

Abstract 

Objective

To generate anchor-based values for the “minimally important difference” (MID) for a number of commonly used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and to examine whether these values could be applied across the continuum of preoperative patient severity.

Study Design and Setting

Six prospective cohort studies of patients undergoing elective surgery at hospitals in England and Wales. Patients completed questionnaires about their health and health-related quality of life before and after surgery. MID values were calculated using the mean change score for a reference group of patients who reported they were “a little better” after surgery minus the mean change score for those who said they were “about the same.” Pearson's correlation was used to examine the association between baseline severity and change scores in the reference group. Baseline severity was expressed in two ways: first in terms of preoperative scores and second in terms of the average of pre- and postoperative scores (Oldham's method).

Results

Of the 10 PRO measures examined, eight demonstrated a moderate or high positive association between preoperative scores and MID values. Only two measures demonstrated such an association when Oldham's measure of baseline severity was used.

Conclusion

In general, there is little association between baseline severity and MID values. However, a moderate association persists for some measures, and it is recommended that researchers continue to test for this relationship when generating anchor-based MID values from change scores.

Keywords: Quality of life, Surgery, Psychometrics, Longitudinal studies, Health services research, Outcome assessment

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-4356(09)00349-7

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.10.004

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 8 , Pages 865-874, August 2010