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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |