Use of the Cumulative Proportion of Responders Analysis Graph to Present Pain Data Over a Range of Cut-Off Points: Making Clinical Trial Data More Understandable

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 369-377

  Farrar, John T ^a   Dworkin, Robert H ^a   Max, Mitchell B ^a  

^a Inst for Res and Reform in Educ   (United States)

Author keywords

clinical trials; data interpretation; pain; Pain measurement; research design; statistical; treatment outcome

Indexed keywords

AMITRIPTYLINE; DESIPRAMINE; FENTANYL; FENTANYL CITRATE; FLUOXETINE; MORPHINE; OPIATE; PLACEBO; PREGABALIN; SEROTONIN UPTAKE INHIBITOR; TRICYCLIC ANTIDEPRESSANT AGENT;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CUMULATIVE PROPORTION OF RESPONDERS ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANALGESICS; CLINICAL TRIALS; DATA DISPLAY; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT;

EID: 33646494052     PISSN: 08853924     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.08.018     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Cook R.J., and Sackett D.L. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. [published erratum appears in Br Med J 1995;310(6986):1056; see comments]. Br Med J 310 6977 (1995) 452-454
2. McQuay H.J., and Moore R.A. Using numerical results from systematic reviews in clinical practice. [see comments]. Ann Intern Med 126 9 (1997) 712-720
3. Farrar J.T., Young Jr. J.P., LaMoreaux L., Werth J.L., and Poole R.M. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 94 2 (2001) 149-158
4. Moore A., Moore O., McQuay H., and Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: use of pain intensity and visual analogue scales. Pain 69 3 (1997) 311-315
5. Beecher H.K. Measurement of subjective responses (1959), Oxford University Press, New York
6. Goldsmith C.H., Boers M., Bombardier C., and Tugwell P. Criteria for clinically important changes in outcomes: development, scoring and evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis patient and trial profiles. OMERACT Committee. J Rheumatol 20 3 (1993) 561-565
7. Farrar J.T., Portenoy R.K., Berlin J.A., Kinman J., and Strom B.L. Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures. Pain 88 3 (2000) 287-294
8. Azzopardi P., and Cowey A. Models of ganglion cell topography in the retina of macaque monkeys and their application to sensory cortical scaling. Neuroscience 72 3 (1996) 617-625
9. Farrar J.T., Cleary J., Rauck R., Busch M., and Nordbrock E. Oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate: randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial for treatment of breakthrough pain in cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 90 8 (1998) 611-616
10. Coluzzi P.H., Schwartzberg L., Conroy J.D., et al. Breakthrough cancer pain: a randomized trial comparing oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) and morphine sulfate immediate release (MSIR). Pain 91 1-2 (2001) 123-130
11. Dworkin R.H., Corbin A.E., Young Jr. J.P., et al. Pregabalin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. [see comment]. Neurology 60 8 (2003) 1274-1283
12. Max M.B., Lynch S.A., Muir J., et al. Effects of desipramine, amitriptyline, and fluoxetine on pain in diabetic neuropathy. N Engl J Med 326 19 (1992) 1250-1256
13. Gracely R.H., and Dubner R. Reliability and validity of verbal descriptor scales of painfulness. Pain 29 2 (1987) 175-185
14. Moore A., McQuay H., and Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics. Pain 66 2-3 (1996) 229-237
15. Hollander M., and Wolfe D.A. A distribution-free test for general differences in two populations. Nonparametric statistical methods. 2nd ed. (1999), John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York 178-188
16. Svensson E. Ordinal invariant measures for individual and group changes in ordered categorical data. Stat Med 17 24 (1998) 2923-2936
17. Hanley J.A., and McNeil B.J. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148 3 (1983) 839-843
18. Redelmeier D.A., Guyatt G.H., and Goldstein R.S. Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: a comparison of two techniques. [see comments]. J Clin Epidemiol 49 11 (1996) 1215-1219
19. Farrar J.T. What is clinically meaningful? Outcome measures in pain clinical trials. Clin J Pain 16S 2 (2000) 106-110
20. Sloan J.A., Cella D., Frost M., et al. Assessing clinical significance in measuring oncology patient quality of life: introduction to the symposium, content overview, and definition of terms. Mayo Clin Proc 77 4 (2002) 367-370
21. Cella D., Bullinger M., Scott C., and Barofsky I. Group vs individual approaches to understanding the clinical significance of differences or changes in quality of life. Mayo Clin Proc 77 4 (2002) 384-392