Linking Clinical Relevance and Statistical Significance in Evaluating Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life

Kathleen W. Wyrwich, Nancy A. Nienaber, William M. Tierney, Fredric D. Wolinsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

412 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. To compare the standard error of measurement (SEM) with established standards for clinically relevant intra-individual change in an evaluation of health-related quality of life. DESIGN. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS. Six hundred and five outpatients with a history of cardiac problems attending the general medicine clinics of a major academic medical center. MEASURES. Baseline and follow-up interviews included a modified version of the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHQ) and the SF-36. The SEM values corresponding to established standards for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) on the CHQ were determined. Individual change on the SF-36 was explored using the same SEM criterion. RESULTS. One-SEM changes in this population corresponded well to the patient-driven MCID standards on all CHQ dimensions (weighted kappas (0.87; P < 0.001). The distributions of outpatients who improved, remained stable, or declined (defined by the one-SEM criterion) were generally consistent between CHQ dimensions and SF-36 subscales. CONCLUSIONS. The use of the SEM to evaluate individual patient change should be explored among other health-related quality of life instruments with established standards for clinically relevant differences. Only then can it be determined whether the one-SEM criterion can be consistently applied as a proxy for clinically meaningful change.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)469-478
Number of pages10
JournalMedical Care
Volume37
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1999

Fingerprint

statistical significance
quality of life
Heart Failure
Quality of Life
health
Outpatients
Proxy
questionnaire
Randomized Controlled Trials
Medicine
Interviews
Surveys and Questionnaires
general medicine
Population
secondary analysis
Minimal Clinically Important Difference

Keywords

  • Clinically relevant change
  • Coronary heart disease
  • Measurement
  • Quality of life
  • Standard error of measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)

Cite this

Linking Clinical Relevance and Statistical Significance in Evaluating Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life. / Wyrwich, Kathleen W.; Nienaber, Nancy A.; Tierney, William M.; Wolinsky, Fredric D.

In: Medical Care, Vol. 37, No. 5, 05.1999, p. 469-478.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wyrwich, Kathleen W. ; Nienaber, Nancy A. ; Tierney, William M. ; Wolinsky, Fredric D. / Linking Clinical Relevance and Statistical Significance in Evaluating Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life. In: Medical Care. 1999 ; Vol. 37, No. 5. pp. 469-478.
@article{77d14acb48b24cca9f567280e7b82195,
title = "Linking Clinical Relevance and Statistical Significance in Evaluating Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. To compare the standard error of measurement (SEM) with established standards for clinically relevant intra-individual change in an evaluation of health-related quality of life. DESIGN. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS. Six hundred and five outpatients with a history of cardiac problems attending the general medicine clinics of a major academic medical center. MEASURES. Baseline and follow-up interviews included a modified version of the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHQ) and the SF-36. The SEM values corresponding to established standards for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) on the CHQ were determined. Individual change on the SF-36 was explored using the same SEM criterion. RESULTS. One-SEM changes in this population corresponded well to the patient-driven MCID standards on all CHQ dimensions (weighted kappas (0.87; P < 0.001). The distributions of outpatients who improved, remained stable, or declined (defined by the one-SEM criterion) were generally consistent between CHQ dimensions and SF-36 subscales. CONCLUSIONS. The use of the SEM to evaluate individual patient change should be explored among other health-related quality of life instruments with established standards for clinically relevant differences. Only then can it be determined whether the one-SEM criterion can be consistently applied as a proxy for clinically meaningful change.",
keywords = "Clinically relevant change, Coronary heart disease, Measurement, Quality of life, Standard error of measurement",
author = "Wyrwich, {Kathleen W.} and Nienaber, {Nancy A.} and Tierney, {William M.} and Wolinsky, {Fredric D.}",
year = "1999",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1097/00005650-199905000-00006",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "469--478",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Linking Clinical Relevance and Statistical Significance in Evaluating Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life

AU - Wyrwich, Kathleen W.

AU - Nienaber, Nancy A.

AU - Tierney, William M.

AU - Wolinsky, Fredric D.

PY - 1999/5

Y1 - 1999/5

N2 - OBJECTIVE. To compare the standard error of measurement (SEM) with established standards for clinically relevant intra-individual change in an evaluation of health-related quality of life. DESIGN. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS. Six hundred and five outpatients with a history of cardiac problems attending the general medicine clinics of a major academic medical center. MEASURES. Baseline and follow-up interviews included a modified version of the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHQ) and the SF-36. The SEM values corresponding to established standards for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) on the CHQ were determined. Individual change on the SF-36 was explored using the same SEM criterion. RESULTS. One-SEM changes in this population corresponded well to the patient-driven MCID standards on all CHQ dimensions (weighted kappas (0.87; P < 0.001). The distributions of outpatients who improved, remained stable, or declined (defined by the one-SEM criterion) were generally consistent between CHQ dimensions and SF-36 subscales. CONCLUSIONS. The use of the SEM to evaluate individual patient change should be explored among other health-related quality of life instruments with established standards for clinically relevant differences. Only then can it be determined whether the one-SEM criterion can be consistently applied as a proxy for clinically meaningful change.

AB - OBJECTIVE. To compare the standard error of measurement (SEM) with established standards for clinically relevant intra-individual change in an evaluation of health-related quality of life. DESIGN. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS. Six hundred and five outpatients with a history of cardiac problems attending the general medicine clinics of a major academic medical center. MEASURES. Baseline and follow-up interviews included a modified version of the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHQ) and the SF-36. The SEM values corresponding to established standards for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) on the CHQ were determined. Individual change on the SF-36 was explored using the same SEM criterion. RESULTS. One-SEM changes in this population corresponded well to the patient-driven MCID standards on all CHQ dimensions (weighted kappas (0.87; P < 0.001). The distributions of outpatients who improved, remained stable, or declined (defined by the one-SEM criterion) were generally consistent between CHQ dimensions and SF-36 subscales. CONCLUSIONS. The use of the SEM to evaluate individual patient change should be explored among other health-related quality of life instruments with established standards for clinically relevant differences. Only then can it be determined whether the one-SEM criterion can be consistently applied as a proxy for clinically meaningful change.

KW - Clinically relevant change

KW - Coronary heart disease

KW - Measurement

KW - Quality of life

KW - Standard error of measurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033125875&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033125875&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00005650-199905000-00006

DO - 10.1097/00005650-199905000-00006

M3 - Article

C2 - 10335749

AN - SCOPUS:0033125875

VL - 37

SP - 469

EP - 478

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 5

ER -