14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

          The flagship journal of the Society for Endocrinology. Learn more

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Determining minimal important change for the thyroid-related quality of life questionnaire ThyPRO

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          ThyPRO is the standard thyroid patient-reported outcome (PRO). The change in scores that patients perceive as important remains to be ascertained. The purpose of this study was to determine values for minimal important change (MIC) for ThyPRO.

          Methods

          A total of 435 patients treated for benign thyroid diseases completed ThyPRO at baseline and 6 weeks following treatment initiation. At 6 weeks follow-up, patients also completed Global Rating of Change items. For each 0–100 scale, two MIC values were identified: An MIC for groups, using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve method and an MIC for individual patients, using the Reliable Change Index.

          Results

          ROC analyses provided group-MIC estimates of 6.3–14.3 (score range 0–100). Evaluation of area under the curve (AUC) supported the robustness for 9 of 14 scales (AUC > 0.7). Reliable Change Index estimates of individual-MIC were 8.0–21.1. For all scales but two, the individual-MIC values were larger than the group-MIC values.

          Conclusions

          Interpretability of ThyPRO was improved by the establishment of MIC values, which was 6.3–14.3 for groups and 8.0–21.1 for individuals. Thus, estimates of which changes are clinically relevant, are now available for future studies. We recommend using MIC values found by ROC analyses to evaluate changes in groups of patients, whereas MIC values identified by a dual criterion, including the reliability of changes, should be used for individual patients, for example, to identify individual responders in clinical studies or practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests

          Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures

            Purpose Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ from reviews of interventions and diagnostic test accuracy studies and are complex. In fact, conducting a review of one or more PROMs comprises of multiple reviews (i.e., one review for each measurement property of each PROM). In the absence of guidance specifically designed for reviews on measurement properties, our aim was to develop a guideline for conducting systematic reviews of PROMs. Methods Based on literature reviews and expert opinions, and in concordance with existing guidelines, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) steering committee developed a guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. Results A consecutive ten-step procedure for conducting a systematic review of PROMs is proposed. Steps 1–4 concern preparing and performing the literature search, and selecting relevant studies. Steps 5–8 concern the evaluation of the quality of the eligible studies, the measurement properties, and the interpretability and feasibility aspects. Steps 9 and 10 concern formulating recommendations and reporting the systematic review. Conclusions The COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs includes methodology to combine the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties with the quality of the PROM itself (i.e., its measurement properties). This enables reviewers to draw transparent conclusions and making evidence-based recommendations on the quality of PROMs, and supports the evidence-based selection of PROMs for use in research and in clinical practice.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation.

              A number of studies have computed the minimally important difference (MID) for health-related quality of life instruments. To determine whether there is consistency in the magnitude of MID estimates from different instruments. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that computed an MID and contained sufficient information to compute an effect size (ES). Thirty-eight studies fulfilled the criteria, resulting in 62 ESs. For all but 6 studies, the MID estimates were close to one half a SD (mean = 0.495, SD = 0.155). There was no consistent relationship with factors such as disease-specific or generic instrument or the number of response options. Negative changes were not associated with larger ESs. Population-based estimation procedures and brief follow-up were associated with smaller ESs, and acute conditions with larger ESs. An explanation for this consistency is that research in psychology has shown that the limit of people's ability to discriminate over a wide range of tasks is approximately 1 part in 7, which is very close to half a SD. In most circumstances, the threshold of discrimination for changes in health-related quality of life for chronic diseases appears to be approximately half a SD.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Endocr Connect
                Endocr Connect
                EC
                Endocrine Connections
                Bioscientifica Ltd (Bristol )
                2049-3614
                March 2021
                10 February 2021
                : 10
                : 3
                : 316-324
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Endocrinology and Metabolism , Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]Institute of Clinical Medicine , University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [3 ]Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism , Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine , Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [5 ]Department of Internal Medicine , Herlev Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [6 ]Department of Public Health , University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [7 ]Department of Palliative Medicine , Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [8 ]National Research Centre for the Working Environment , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [9 ]QualityMetric Incorporated , LLC, Johnston, Rhode Island, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence should be addressed to T Watt: Torquil.Watt@ 123456regionh.dk
                Article
                EC-21-0026
                10.1530/EC-21-0026
                8052573
                33617467
                8f067fc2-dd1a-48ff-ba84-eb5bc38e4673
                © 2021 The authors

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 29 January 2020
                : 10 February 2021
                Categories
                Research

                minimal important change,thypro,thyroid-related quality of life,patient-reported outcomes,interpretability

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log