Cargando…

Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis

BACKGROUND: The minimum clinical important differences (MCIDs) of resilience instruments in patients with cancer have not been comprehensively described. This study was designed to evaluate MCIDs of 10-item and 25-item resilience scales specific to cancer (RS-SC-10 and RS-SC-25). METHODS: From June...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ye, Zeng Jie, Zhang, Zhang, Tang, Ying, Liang, Jian, Zhang, Xiao Ying, Hu, Guang Yun, Sun, Zhe, Liang, Mu Zi, Yu, Yuan Liang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7724855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33298059
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01631-6
_version_ 1783620602107527168
author Ye, Zeng Jie
Zhang, Zhang
Tang, Ying
Liang, Jian
Zhang, Xiao Ying
Hu, Guang Yun
Sun, Zhe
Liang, Mu Zi
Yu, Yuan Liang
author_facet Ye, Zeng Jie
Zhang, Zhang
Tang, Ying
Liang, Jian
Zhang, Xiao Ying
Hu, Guang Yun
Sun, Zhe
Liang, Mu Zi
Yu, Yuan Liang
author_sort Ye, Zeng Jie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The minimum clinical important differences (MCIDs) of resilience instruments in patients with cancer have not been comprehensively described. This study was designed to evaluate MCIDs of 10-item and 25-item resilience scales specific to cancer (RS-SC-10 and RS-SC-25). METHODS: From June 2015 to December 2018, RS-SCs were longitudinally measured in 765 patients with different cancer diagnoses at baseline (T0) and 3 months later (T1). The EORTC QLQ-C30, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Allostatic Load Index were measured concurrently as anchors. Anchor-based methods (linear regression, within-group), distribution-based methods(within-group), and receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs, within-subject) were performed to evaluate the MCIDs. RESULTS: 623 of 765 (84.1%) patients had paired RS-SCs scores. Moderate correlations were identified between the change in RS-SCs and change in anchors (r = 0.38–0.44, all p < 0.001). Linear regression estimated + 8.9 and − 6.7 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 3.4 and − 2.5 for RS-SC-10. Distribution-based methods estimated + 9.9 and − 9.9 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 4.0 and − 4.0 for RS-SC-10. ROC estimated + 5.5 and − 4.5 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 2.0 and − 1.5 for RS-SC-10. CONCLUSIONS: The most reliable MCID is around 5 points for RS-SC-25 and 2 points for RS-SC-10. RS-SCs are more responsive to the worsening status of resilience in patients with cancer and these estimates could be useful in future resilience-based intervention trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7724855
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77248552020-12-09 Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis Ye, Zeng Jie Zhang, Zhang Tang, Ying Liang, Jian Zhang, Xiao Ying Hu, Guang Yun Sun, Zhe Liang, Mu Zi Yu, Yuan Liang Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The minimum clinical important differences (MCIDs) of resilience instruments in patients with cancer have not been comprehensively described. This study was designed to evaluate MCIDs of 10-item and 25-item resilience scales specific to cancer (RS-SC-10 and RS-SC-25). METHODS: From June 2015 to December 2018, RS-SCs were longitudinally measured in 765 patients with different cancer diagnoses at baseline (T0) and 3 months later (T1). The EORTC QLQ-C30, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Allostatic Load Index were measured concurrently as anchors. Anchor-based methods (linear regression, within-group), distribution-based methods(within-group), and receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs, within-subject) were performed to evaluate the MCIDs. RESULTS: 623 of 765 (84.1%) patients had paired RS-SCs scores. Moderate correlations were identified between the change in RS-SCs and change in anchors (r = 0.38–0.44, all p < 0.001). Linear regression estimated + 8.9 and − 6.7 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 3.4 and − 2.5 for RS-SC-10. Distribution-based methods estimated + 9.9 and − 9.9 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 4.0 and − 4.0 for RS-SC-10. ROC estimated + 5.5 and − 4.5 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 2.0 and − 1.5 for RS-SC-10. CONCLUSIONS: The most reliable MCID is around 5 points for RS-SC-25 and 2 points for RS-SC-10. RS-SCs are more responsive to the worsening status of resilience in patients with cancer and these estimates could be useful in future resilience-based intervention trials. BioMed Central 2020-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7724855/ /pubmed/33298059 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01631-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Ye, Zeng Jie
Zhang, Zhang
Tang, Ying
Liang, Jian
Zhang, Xiao Ying
Hu, Guang Yun
Sun, Zhe
Liang, Mu Zi
Yu, Yuan Liang
Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title_full Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title_fullStr Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title_full_unstemmed Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title_short Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
title_sort minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7724855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33298059
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01631-6
work_keys_str_mv AT yezengjie minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT zhangzhang minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT tangying minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT liangjian minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT zhangxiaoying minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT huguangyun minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT sunzhe minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT liangmuzi minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis
AT yuyuanliang minimumclinicalimportantdifferenceforresiliencescalespecifictocanceraprospectiveanalysis