Minimal important difference: Values for the Foot Health Status Questionnaire, Foot Function Index and Visual Analogue Scale

Foot

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 15-19

  Landorf, Karl B ^a   Radford, Joel A ^b  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Clinical significance; Measurement; Minimal important difference; Statistical significance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; DISABILITY; FOOT; FOOT FUNCTION INDEX; FOOT HEALTH STATUS QUESTIONNAIRE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PLANTAR FASCIITIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 44249123316     PISSN: 09582592     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foot.2007.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Man-Son-Hing M., Laupacis A., O'Rourke K., Molnar F.J., Mahon J., Chan K.B.Y., et al. Determination of the clinical importance of study results: A review. J Gen Intern Med 17 (2002) 469-476
2. Portney L.G., and Watkins M.P. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 2nd ed. (2000), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
3. Kraemer H.C. Reporting the size of effects in research studies to facilitate assessment of practical or clinical significance. Psychoneuroendocrinology 17 (1992) 527-536
4. Kazis L.E., Anderson J.J., and Meenan R.F. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 27 (1989) S178-S189
5. Wells G.A., Tugwell P., Kraag G.R., Baker P.R.A., Groh J., and Redelmeier D.A. Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective. J Rheumatol 20 (1993) 557-560
6. Jaeschke R., Singer J., and Guyatt G.H. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clin Trials 10 (1989) 407-415
7. Schunemann H.J., and Guyatt G.H. Commentary-Goodbye M(C)ID! Hello MID, Where do you come from. Health Serv Res 40 2 (2005) 593-597
8. Stucki G., Liang M.H., Fossel A.H., and Katz J.N. Relative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Clin Epidemiol 48 11 (1995) 1369-1378
9. Landorf K.B., Radford J.A., Keenan A.-M., and Redmond A.C. Effectiveness of low-dye taping for the short-term management of plantar fasciitis. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 95 6 (2005) 525-530
10. Landorf K.B., Keenan A.-M., and Herbert R.D. Effectiveness of foot orthoses to treat plantar fasciitis: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med 166 12 (2006) 1305-1310
11. Bennett P.J., and Patterson C. The Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ): a new instrument for measuring outcomes of footcare. Australas J Podiatr Med 32 3 (1998) 87-92
12. Bennett P.J., Patterson C., Wearing S., and Baglioni T. Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 88 9 (1998) 419-428
13. Budiman-Mak E., Conrad K.J., and Roach K.E. The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol 44 6 (1991) 561-570
14. Revill S.I., Robinson J.O., Rosen M., and Hogg M.I.J. The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain. Anaesthesia 31 (1976) 1191-1198
15. Scott J., and Huskisson E.C. Graphic representation of pain. Pain 2 (1976) 175-184
16. Angst F., Aeschlimann A., and Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Care Res 45 4 (2001) 384-391
17. Bessette L., Sangha O., Kuntz K., Keller R., Lew R.A., Fossel A.H., et al. Comparitive responsiveness of generic versus disease-specific and weighted versus unweighted health status measures in carpal tunnel syndrome. Med Care 36 (1998) 491-502
18. Haag O., Fritzell P., and Nordwall A. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12 (2003) 12-20
19. Redelmeier D.A., Goldstein R.S., Min S.T., and Hyland R.H. Spirometry and Dyspnea in patients with COPD: when small differences mean little. Chest 109 (1996) 1163-1168
20. Redelmeier D.A., Bayoumi A.M., Goldstein R.S., and Guyatt G. Interpreting small differences in functional status: The 6 min walk test in chronic lung disease patients. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 155 (1997) 1278-1282
21. Landorf K.B., and Keenan A.-M. An evaluation of two foot-specific, health-related quality-of-life measuring instruments. Foot Ankle Int 23 (2002) 538-546
22. Gallagher E.J., Liebman M., and Bijur P.E. Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain severity measured on a visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med 38 6 (2001) 633-638
23. Kelly A.-M. Does the clinically significant difference in visual analog scale pain scores vary with gender, age, or cause of pain?. Acad Emerg Med 5 11 (1998) 1086-1090
24. Kelly A.-M. The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain. Emerg Med J 18 3 (2001) 205-207
25. Libman M., Berkoff D., Lahn M., Bijur P.E., and Gallagher E.J. Independent validation of minimum clinically important change in pain scores as measured by visual analog scale. Acad Emerg Med 7 (2000) 550
26. Powell C.V., Kelly A.-M., and Williams A. Determining the minimum clinically significant difference in visual analog pain score for children. Ann Emerg Med 37 (2001) 28-31
27. Todd K.H., Funk K.G., Funk J., and Bonacci R. Clinical significance of reported changes in pain severity. Ann Emerg Med 27 4 (1996) 485-489
28. Friedman L.M., Furberg C.D., and DeMets D.L. Fundamentals of clinical trials (1998), Springer, New York