Cargando…
Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders
PURPOSE: Estimates of the minimally important change (MIC) can be used to evaluate whether group-level differences are large enough to be important. But responders to treatment have been based upon group-level MIC thresholds, resulting in inaccurate classification of change over time. This article r...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204732/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34129173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02897-z |
_version_ | 1783708386094743552 |
---|---|
author | Hays, Ron D. Peipert, John Devin |
author_facet | Hays, Ron D. Peipert, John Devin |
author_sort | Hays, Ron D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Estimates of the minimally important change (MIC) can be used to evaluate whether group-level differences are large enough to be important. But responders to treatment have been based upon group-level MIC thresholds, resulting in inaccurate classification of change over time. This article reviews options and provides suggestions about individual-level statistics to assess whether individuals have improved, stayed the same, or declined. METHODS: Review of MIC estimation and an example of misapplication of MIC group-level estimates to assess individual change. Secondary data analysis to show how perceptions about meaningful change can be used along with significance of individual change. RESULTS: MIC thresholds yield over-optimistic conclusions about responders to treatment because they classify those who have not changed as responders. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies need to evaluate the significance of individual change using appropriate individual-level statistics such as the reliable change index or the equivalent coefficient of repeatability. Supplementing individual statistical significance with retrospective assessments of change is desirable. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8204732 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82047322021-06-15 Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders Hays, Ron D. Peipert, John Devin Qual Life Res Commentary PURPOSE: Estimates of the minimally important change (MIC) can be used to evaluate whether group-level differences are large enough to be important. But responders to treatment have been based upon group-level MIC thresholds, resulting in inaccurate classification of change over time. This article reviews options and provides suggestions about individual-level statistics to assess whether individuals have improved, stayed the same, or declined. METHODS: Review of MIC estimation and an example of misapplication of MIC group-level estimates to assess individual change. Secondary data analysis to show how perceptions about meaningful change can be used along with significance of individual change. RESULTS: MIC thresholds yield over-optimistic conclusions about responders to treatment because they classify those who have not changed as responders. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies need to evaluate the significance of individual change using appropriate individual-level statistics such as the reliable change index or the equivalent coefficient of repeatability. Supplementing individual statistical significance with retrospective assessments of change is desirable. Springer International Publishing 2021-06-15 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8204732/ /pubmed/34129173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02897-z Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Hays, Ron D. Peipert, John Devin Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title | Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title_full | Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title_fullStr | Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title_full_unstemmed | Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title_short | Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
title_sort | between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204732/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34129173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02897-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT haysrond betweengroupminimallyimportantchangeversusindividualtreatmentresponders AT peipertjohndevin betweengroupminimallyimportantchangeversusindividualtreatmentresponders |