How scoring limits the usability of minimal important differences (MIDs) as responder definition (RD): an exemplary demonstration using EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales.
Saved in:
| Title: | How scoring limits the usability of minimal important differences (MIDs) as responder definition (RD): an exemplary demonstration using EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cocks, Kim, Buchanan, Jacqueline |
| Source: | Quality of Life Research. May2023, Vol. 32 Issue 5, p1247-1253. 7p. 1 Color Photograph, 3 Charts, 1 Graph. |
| Subjects: | Patients, Medical care, Patient compliance, Health behavior, Patient participation |
| Abstract: | Purpose: The recommended method for establishing a meaningful threshold for individual changes in patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores over time uses an anchor-based method. The patients assess their perceived level of change and this is used to define a threshold on the PRO score which may be considered meaningful to the patient. In practice, such an anchor may not be available. In the absence of alternative information often the meaningful change threshold for assessing between-group differences, the minimally important difference, is used to define meaningful change at the individual level too. This paper will highlight the issues with this, especially where the underlying measurement scale is not continuous. Methods: Using the EORTC QLQ-C30 as an example, plausible score increments ("state changes") are calculated for each subscale highlighting why commonly used thresholds may be misleading, including leading to sensitivity analyses that are inadvertently testing the same underlying threshold. Results: The minimal possible individual score change varies across subscales; 6.7 for Physical Functioning, 8.3 for Global Health Scale and Emotional Functioning, 11.1 for fatigue, 16.7 for role functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning, nausea and vomiting, pain and 33.3 for single items. Conclusions: The determination of meaningful change for an individual patient requires input from the patients but being mindful of the underlying scale ensures that these thresholds are also guided by what is a plausible change for patients to achieve on the scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Quality of Life Research is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
