Clinical significance of patient-reported questionnaire data: another step toward consensus

[23] presented an analysis that indicated a "remarkable universality" among estimates of clinical significance that centered around roughly one half the standard deviation (1/2 SD) of the QOL measure involved. [...]Cohen's widely used rules of thumb for interpreting the magnitude of d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical epidemiology 2005-12, Vol.58 (12), p.1217-1219
Main Authors: Sloan, Jeff A., Cella, David, Hays, Ron D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Clinical trials
Consensus
Data Collection
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Epidemiology
Estimates
Health Surveys
Humans
Methods
Neoplasms - psychology
Neoplasms - therapy
Quality of Life
Reproducibility of Results
Surveys and Questionnaires
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:[23] presented an analysis that indicated a "remarkable universality" among estimates of clinical significance that centered around roughly one half the standard deviation (1/2 SD) of the QOL measure involved. [...]Cohen's widely used rules of thumb for interpreting the magnitude of differences offer 0.50 SD (1/2 SD) as a medium effect size and 0.20 SD (1/5 SD) as a small effect.\n Individual variability across specific samples is to be expected, characterized, and then incorporated into the analysis rather than cited as a weakness. If feasible, multiple approaches to estimating a tool's clinically meaningful effect size in multiple patient groups are helpful in assessing the variability of the estimates; however, the lack of multiple approaches with multiple groups should not preemptively restrict application of information gained to date.
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.009