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

,Accepted 23 October 2009.

References 

  1. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE. Determining a minimal important change in a disease specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:81–87
  2. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J. Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:139–144
  3. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:407–415
  4. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1988;
  5. Wyrich K, Nienaber N, Tierney W. Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:861–873
  6. Deyo RA, Inui TS, Leininger J, Overman S. Physical and psychosocial function in rheumatoid arthritis: clinical use of a self-administered health status instrument. Arch Intern Med. 1982;142:879–882
  7. Kulkarni AV. Distribution-based and anchor-based approaches provided different interpretability estimates for the Hydrocephalus Outcome Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:176–184
  8. Eton DT, Cella D, Yount SE, Davis KM. Validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung Symptom Index-12 (FLSI-12). Lung Cancer. 2007;57:339–347
  9. Bradley C. Feedback on the FDA's February 2006 draft guidance on patient reported outcome (PRO) measures from a developer of PRO measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:78
  10. Revicki DA, Cella D, Hays RD, Sloan JA, Lenderking WR, Aaronson NK. Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:70
  11. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:395–407
  12. Schwartz AL, Meek PM, Nail LM, Fargo J, Lundquist M, Donofrio M, et al. Measurement of fatigue determining minimally important clinical differences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:239–244
  13. Kocks JWH, Tuinenga MG, Uil SM, van den Berg JWK, Stahl E, van der Molen T. Health status measurement in COPD: the minimal clinically important difference of the clinical COPD questionnaire. Respir Res. 2006;7:62
  14. Hsieh Y, Wang C, Wu S, Chen P, Sheu C, Hsieh C. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Barthel Index in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:233–236
  15. Coyne KS, Matza LS, Thompson CL, Kopp ZS, Khullar V. Determining the importance of change in the overactive bladder questionnaire. J Urol. 2006;176:627–632
  16. Darzi A. Our NHS, our future. London, UK: Department of Health; 2007;p. 41
  17. Smith SC, Cano S, Lamping DL, Stainiszewska S, Browne J, Lewsey J, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for routine use in treatment centres: recommendations based on a review of the scientific evidence. London, UK: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2005;
  18. Morley AD, Sharp HR. A review of sinonasal outcome scoring systems—which is the best?. Clin Otolaryngol. 2006;31:103–109
  19. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH. Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther. 1998;78:1186–1196
  20. Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Binkley JM. Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2. Phys Ther. 1998;78:1197–1207
  21. Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:82
  22. Bird SB, Dickson EW. Clinically significant changes in pain along the visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:639–643
  23. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. An integrated method to determine meaningful changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1153–1160
  24. Jensen MP, Chen C, Brugger AM. Interpretation of visual analogue scale ratings and change scores: a reanalysis of two clinical trials of postoperative pain. J Pain. 2003;4:407–414
  25. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:29–33
  26. ten Klooster PM, Drossaers-Bakker KW, Taal E, van de Laar MAFJ. Patient-perceived satisfactory improvement (PPSI): interpreting meaningful change in pain from the patient's perspective. Pain. 2006;121:151–157
  27. Baker DW, Hays RD, Brook RH. Understanding changes in health status: is the floor phenomenon merely the last step of the staircase?. Med Care. 1997;35:1–15
  28. Farrar JT, Young JP, La Moreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158
  29. Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality of life research. How meaningful is it?. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;18:419–423
  30. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:102–109
  31. Tu YK, Gilthorpe MS. Revisiting the relation between change and initial value: a review and evaluation. Stat Med. 2007;26:443–457
  32. Oldham PD. A note on the analysis of repeated measurements of the same subjects. J Chronic Dis. 1962;15:969–977
  33. Hopkins C, Browne JP, Slack R, Lund V, Topham J, Reeves BR, et al. The national comparative audit of surgery for nasal polyposis and chronic rhinosinusitis. Clin Otolaryngol. 2006;31:390–398
  34. Piccirillo JF, Merritt MG, Richards ML. Psychometric and clinimetric validity of the 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;126:41–78
  35. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Stein OD, Javitt JC, Sharkey P, Cassard SD, et al. The VF14: an index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:630–638
  36. EuroQol Group . A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208
  37. Jenkinson C, Layte R, Lawrence K. Development and testing of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form health survey summary scale scores in the United Kingdom: results from a large-scale survey and clinical trial. Med Care. 1997;35:410–416
  38. Garratt AM, Macdonald LM, Ruta DA, Russell IT, Buckingham JK, Krukowski ZH. Towards measurement of outcome for patients with varicose veins. Qual Health Care. 1993;2:5–10
  39. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:185–190
  40. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:63–69
  41. Guyatt GH, Norman GR, Juniper EF, Griffith LE. A critical look at transition ratings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:900–908
  42. Greenen R, van de Vijver FJR. A simple test of the law of initial value. Psychophysiology. 1993;30:525–530
  43. Stata Corporation. Statistical software: release 9. 2007; College Station, Texas
  44. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G. Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:869–879
  45. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual of Life Res. 2005;14:1523–1532
  46. Schünemann HJ, Guyatt GH. Goodbye M(C)ID! Hello MID, where do you come from?. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:593–597
  47. Tu YK, Maddick IH, Griffiths GS, Gilthorpe MS. Mathematical coupling can undermine the statistical assessment of clinical research: illustration from the treatment of guided tissue regeneration. J Dent. 2004;32:133–142
  48. Wilder J. Modern psychophysiology and the law of initial value. Am J Psychother. 1958;12:199–221

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

Article Tools