Estimating the minimal clinically important difference for the Physical Component Summary of the Short Form 36 for patients with stroke

1. Duncan, PW, Jorgensen, HS, Wade, DT. Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. Stroke 2000; 31: 1429–1438.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI2. Salter, KL, Teasell, RW, Foley, NC, et al. Outcome assessment in randomized controlled trials of stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 86: 1007–1012.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Anderson, C, Laubscher, S, Burns, R. Validation of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients. Stroke 1996; 27: 1812–1816.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI4. McHorney, CA, Ware, JE, Raczek, AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247–263.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI5. Salaffi, F, Carotti, M, Ciapetti, A, et al. A comparison of utility measurement using EQ-5D and SF-6D preference-based generic instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2011; 29: 661–671.
Google Scholar | Medline | ISI6. Jaeschke, R, Singer, J, Guyatt, GH. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Cont Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407–415.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline7. McGlothlin, AE, Lewis, RJ. Minimal Clinically Important Difference: Defining What Really Matters to Patients. JAMA 2014; 312: 1342–1343.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI8. Revicki, D, Hays, RD, Cella, D, et al. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 102–109.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI9. Liang, MH, Lew, RA, Stucki, G, et al. Measuring clinically important changes with patient-oriented questionnaires. Med Care 2002; 40: II45–II51.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI10. Norman, GR, Sloan, JA, Wyrwich, KW. Interpretation of Changes in Health-related Quality of Life: The Remarkable Universality of Half a Standard Deviation. Med Care 2003; 41: 582–592.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI11. Strand, V, Singh, JA Improved health-related quality of life with effective disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: evidence from randomized controlled trials. Am J Manag Care 2008; 14: 234–254.
Google Scholar | Medline12. Parker, SL, Adogwa, O, Mendenhall, SK, et al. Determination of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in pain, disability, and quality of life after revision fusion for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis. Spine J 2012; 12: 1122–1128.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI13. Copay, AG, Glassman, SD, Subach, BR, et al. 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. Spine J 2008; 6: 968–974.
Google Scholar | Crossref14. Carreon, LY, Glassman, SD, Campbell, MJ, et al. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J 2010; 6: 469–474.
Google Scholar | Crossref15. Fu, V, Weatherall, M, McPherson, K, et al. Taking Charge after Stroke: A randomized controlled trial of a person-centered, self-directed rehabilitation intervention. Int J Stroke 2020; 15: 954–964.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI16. Von Elm, E, Altman, DG, Egger, M, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies BMJ 2007; 335: 806.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline17. Ware, JE, Snow, KK, Kosinski, M, et al. SF-36 Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1993.
Google Scholar18. Ware, JE, Kosinski, M., Keller, SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User's Manual. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1994.
Google Scholar19. Gandek, B, Ware, JE, Aaronson, NK. Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1171–1178.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI20. Samsa, G, Edelman, D, Rothman, ML, et al. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 141–155.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI21. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, 1988.
Google Scholar22. Eton, DT, Cella, D, Yost, KJ, et al. A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale. J Clin Epidemiol 2004; 57: 898–910.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI23. Hawkes, WG, Williams, GR, Zimmerman, S, et al. A clinically meaningful difference was generated for a performance measure of recovery from hip fracture. J Clin Epidemiol 2004; 57: 1019–1024.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline24. Salinas, J, Sprinkhuizen, SM, Ackerson, T, et al. An International Standard Set of Patient-Centered Outcome Measures After Stroke. Stroke 2016; 47: 180–186.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline25. Van Swieten, JC, Koudstaal, PJ, Visser, MC, et al. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1988; 19: 604–607.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI26. Lees, KR, Bath, PM, Schellinger, PD, et al. Contemporary outcome measures in acute stroke research: choice of primary outcome measure. Stroke 2012; 43: 1163–1170.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif