Estimating minimally important difference (MID) in PROMIS pediatric measures using the scale-judgment method

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 13-23

  Thissen, David ^a   Liu, Yang ^a   Magnus, Brooke ^a   Quinn, Hally ^a   Gipson, Debbie S ^b   Dampier, Carlton ^c   Huang, I Chan ^d,j   Hinds, Pamela S ^e,f   Selewski, David T ^b   Reeve, Bryce B ^g   Gross, Heather E ^h   DeWalt, Darren A ⁱ  

^a The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^e CHILDREN'S NATIONAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^j ST JUDE CHILDREN S RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Item response theory; Minimally important difference; Patient reported outcomes; Pediatrics; PROMIS; Self report

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CAREGIVER; DEPRESSION; FATIGUE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MALE; MINIMALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN; PARENT; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES MEASUREMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM; PHYSICAL MOBILITY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REFERENCE VALUE; VIGNETTE; CHILD; DECISION MAKING; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; PEDIATRICS; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF REPORT; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHILD; DEPRESSION; FATIGUE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); PAIN; PARENTS; PEDIATRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF REPORT; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84953839600     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: 15732649     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1058-8     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Guyatt, G. H., Osoba, D., Wu, A. W., Wyrwich, K. W., & Norman, G. R. (2002). Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clinic Proceedings,77(4), 371–383. doi:10.4065/77.4.371.
2. 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(2), 102–109. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012.
3. Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989). Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials,10(4), 407–415. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6.
4. Wells, G., Li, T., Maxwell, L., MacLean, R., & Tugwell, P. (2007). Determining the minimal clinically important differences in activity, fatigue, and sleep quality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Rheumatology,34(2), 280–289.
5. Bellamy, N., Anastassiades, T. P., Buchanan, W. W., Davis, P., Lee, P., McCain, G. A., et al. (1991). Rheumatoid arthritis antirheumatic drug trials. III. Setting the delta for clinical trials of antirheumatic drugs—Results of a consensus development (Delphi) exercise. Journal of Rheumatology,18(12), 1908–1915.
6. Bellamy, N., Buchanan, W. W., Esdaile, J. M., Fam, A. G., Kean, W. F., Thompson, J. M., et al. (1991). Ankylosing spondylitis antirheumatic drug trials. III. Setting the delta for clinical trials of antirheumatic drugs—Results of a consensus development (Delphi) exercise. Journal of Rheumatology,18(11), 1716–1722.
7. Bellamy, N., Carette, S., Ford, P. M., Kean, W. F., le Riche, N. G., Lussier, A., et al. (1992). Osteoarthritis antirheumatic drug trials. III. Setting the delta for clinical trials–results of a consensus development (Delphi) exercise. Journal of Rheumatology,19(3), 451–457.
8. Spiegel, B. M., Younossi, Z. M., Hays, R. D., Revicki, D., Robbins, S., & Kanwal, F. (2005). Impact of hepatitis C on health related quality of life: A systematic review and quantitative assessment. Hepatology,41(4), 790–800. doi:10.1002/hep.20659.
9. Wyrwich, K. W., Metz, S. M., Kroenke, K., Tierney, W. M., Babu, A. N., & Wolinsky, F. D. (2007). Triangulating patient and clinician perspectives on clinically important differences in health-related quality of life among patients with heart disease. Health Services Research,42(6 Pt 1), 2257–2274. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00733.x.
10. Rai, S. K., Yazdany, J., Fortin, P. R., & Avina-Zubieta, J. A. (2015). Approaches for estimating minimal clinically important differences in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Research & Therapy,17, 143. doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0658-6.
11. van Walraven, C., Mahon, J. L., Moher, D., Bohm, C., & Laupacis, A. (1999). Surveying physicians to determine the minimal important difference: Implications for sample-size calculation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,52(8), 717–723. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00050-5.
12. Todd, K. H., & Funk, J. P. (1996). The minimum clinically important difference in physician-assigned visual analog pain scores. Academic Emergency Medicine,3(2), 142–146. doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.1996.tb03402.x.
13. Dempster, H., Porepa, M., Young, N., & Feldman, B. M. (2001). The clinical meaning of functional outcome scores in children with juvenile arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism,44(8), 1768–1774. doi:10.1002/1529-0131(200108)44:8<1768:AID-ART312>3.0.CO;2-Q.
14. Gong, G. W., Young, N. L., Dempster, H., Porepa, M., & Feldman, B. M. (2007). The Quality of My Life questionnaire: The minimal clinically important difference for pediatric rheumatology patients. Journal of Rheumatology,34(3), 581–587.
15. Kingston, N. M., Kahl, S. R., Sweeney, K. P., & Bay, L. (2001). Setting performance standards using the body of work method. In G. J. Cizek (Ed.), Setting performance standards: Concepts, methods, and perspectives (pp. 219–248). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
16. Cella, D., Choi, S., Garcia, S., Cook, K. F., Rosenbloom, S., Lai, J. S., et al. (2014). Setting standards for severity of common symptoms in oncology using the PROMIS item banks and expert judgment. Quality of Life Research,. doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0732-6.
17. Cook, K. F., Victorson, D. E., Cella, D., Schalet, B. D., & Miller, D. (2015). Creating meaningful cut-scores for Neuro-QOL measures of fatigue, physical functioning and sleep disturbance using standard setting with patients and providers. Quality of Life Research,24(3), 575–589. doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0790-9.
18. Irwin, D. E., Stucky, B., Langer, M. M., Thissen, D., Dewitt, E. M., Lai, J. S., et al. (2010). An item response analysis of the pediatric PROMIS anxiety and depressive symptoms scales. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation,19(4), 595–607. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9619-3.
19. Varni, J. W., Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., Dewitt, E. M., Irwin, D. E., Lai, J. S., et al. (2010). PROMIS Pediatric Pain Interference Scale: An item response theory analysis of the Pediatric Pain Item Bank. Journal of Pain,11(11), 1109–1119. doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2010.02.005.
20. ® pediatric fatigue item banks. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation,. doi:10.1007/s11136-013-0357-1.
21. Dewitt, E. M., Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., Irwin, D. E., Langer, M., Varni, J. W., et al. (2011). Construction of the eight-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pediatric physical function scales: Built using item response theory. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,64(7), 794–804. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.10.012.
22. Qualtrics. (2013). Qualtrics research suite (version 37892). Provo, UT.
23. Robinson-Cimpian, J. P. (2014). Inaccurate estimation of disparities due to mischievous responders: Several suggestions to assess conclusions. Educational Researcher,43(4), 171–185. doi:10.3102/0013189x14534297.
24. Thissen, D. (1982). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation for the one-parameter logistic model. Psychometrika,47(2), 175–186. doi:10.1007/bf02296273.
25. Yost, K. J., Eton, D. T., Garcia, S. F., & Cella, D. (2011). Minimally important differences were estimated for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,64(5), 507–516. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.018.
26. Copay, A. G., Glassman, S. D., Subach, B. R., Berven, S., Schuler, T. C., & Carreon, L. Y. (2008). Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: A choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. The Spine Journal,8(6), 968–974. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.11.006.
27. Copay, A. G. (2012). Commentary: The proliferation of minimum clinically important differences. The Spine Journal,12(12), 1129–1131. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2012.11.022.
28. Demyttenaere, K., Desaiah, D., Petit, C., Croenlein, J., & Brecht, S. (2009). Patient-assessed versus physician-assessed disease severity and outcome in patients with nonspecific pain associated with major depressive disorder. Primary Care Companion to the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,11(1), 8–15. doi:10.4088/PCC.08m00670.