Determining a minimum clinically important difference between treatments for a patient-reported outcome

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1043-1054

  Kirby, Simon ^a   Chuang Stein, Christy ^b   Morris, Mark ^a  

^a PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United Kingdom)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Minimum clinically important difference; Minimum important difference; Responder

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIABETIC NEUROPATHY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MINIMUM CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; NEUROPATHIC PAIN; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME; POSTHERPETIC NEURALGIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; SAMPLE SIZE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ALGORITHMS; BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DIABETIC NEUROPATHIES; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEURALGIA; NEURALGIA, POSTHERPETIC; SAMPLE SIZE; SELF REPORT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77955859912     PISSN: 10543406     EISSN: 15205711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10543400903315757     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Chuang-Stein, C., Kirby, S., Hirsch, I., Atkinson, G. (2010). The role of the minimum clinically important difference and its impact on designing a trial. Submitted for publication.
2. Crosby, R. D., Kolotkin, R. L., Williams, G. R. (2003). Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 56:395-407.
3. Dellaportas, P., Stephens, D. A. (1995). Bayesian analysis of errors-in-variables regression models. Biometrics 51:1085-1095.
4. Farrar, J. T., Young, J. P. Jnr., La Moreaux, L., Worth, J. L., Poole, R. M. (2001). Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 94:149-158.
5. Food and Drug Administration. (2006). Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Draft guidance. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ Drugs/GuidanceCompliance RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf
6. International Conference on Harmonization. ( 1998). ICH-E9 Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/pdfs/ human/ich/036396en.pdf
7. Laupacis, A., Sackett, D. L., Roberts, R. S. (1988). An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. New England Journal of Medicine 318(26): 1728-1733.
8. Lunn, D. J., Thomas, A., Best, N., Spiegelhalter, D. (2000). WinBUGS-A Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Statistics and Computing 10:325-337.
9. Patrick, D. L., Burke, L. B., Powers, J. H., Scott, J. A., Rock, E. P., Dawisha, S., O'Neill, R., Kennedy, D. L. (2007). Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value in Health 10:S125-S137.
10. Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 61:102-109.
11. Senn, S. (2004). Individual response to treatment: Is it a valid assumption? British Medical Journal 329:966-968.
12. Wyrwich, K. W., Bullinger, M., Aaronson, N., Hays, R. D., Patrick, D. L., Symonds, T., and the Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. (2005). Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes. Quality of Life Research 14:285-295.