☆ 4.1 Letter

Do we really need to calculate a minimal important difference for ALSFRS-R?: A letter in response to Clinically meaningful change: evaluation of the Rasch-built Overall Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Disability Scale (ROADS) and the ALSFRS-R' published in Vol. 24(3-4), pp. 311-316

AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS AND FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION (2023)

Clinically meaningful change: evaluation of the Rasch-built Overall Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Disability Scale (ROADS) and the ALSFRS-R

Christina N. Fournier et al.

Summary: This study investigates the clinically meaningful change of ROADS and ALSFRS-R using a patient-defined approach. The study found that changes less than 5.81 points on the normed ROADS score or less than 3.24 points on the ALSFRS-R sum-score may not be clinically meaningful. It is important to understand the limitations of these scales in designing and interpreting ALS research studies.

AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS AND FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION (2023)

添加到收藏夹

Letter Clinical Neurology

Minimal detectable change and minimal clinically important difference in spinal muscular atrophy patients

Juan F. Vazquez-Costa et al.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Article Clinical Neurology

An old friend who has overstayed their welcome: the ALSFRS-R total score as primary endpoint for ALS clinical trials

Ruben P. A. van Eijk et al.

Summary: The study evaluated how multidimensionality affects the performance of the ALSFRS-R in clinical trials. Results suggest that ignoring the multidimensional structure may have negative consequences for ALS clinical trials. It is recommended to assess treatment benefit on a subscale level before concluding the overall effectiveness of a treatment.

AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS AND FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Review Health Care Sciences & Services

Minimal important change (MIC): a conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures

Caroline B. Terwee et al.

Summary: The minimal important change (MIC) is defined as a threshold for a minimal within-person change over time; estimation of MIC values should be conducted using appropriate methods, with current studies suggesting a reasonable range of 2-6 T-score points for PROMIS measures.

QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Review Clinical Neurology

The minimum clinically important difference: which direction to take

T. H. P. Draak et al.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Article Clinical Neurology

Evidence of multidimensionality in the ALSFRS- R Scale: a critical appraisal on its measurement properties using Rasch analysis

Franco Franchignoni et al.

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY (2013)

添加到收藏夹

Article Clinical Neurology

Functional scales: Summary

BR Brooks

AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS AND OTHER MOTOR NEURON DISORDERS (2002)

添加到收藏夹

Do we really need to calculate a minimal important difference for ALSFRS-R?: A letter in response to Clinically meaningful change: evaluation of the Rasch-built Overall Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Disability Scale (ROADS) and the ALSFRS-R' published in Vol. 24(3-4), pp. 311-316

相关参考文献

Clinically meaningful change: evaluation of the Rasch-built Overall Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Disability Scale (ROADS) and the ALSFRS-R

Minimal detectable change and minimal clinically important difference in spinal muscular atrophy patients

An old friend who has overstayed their welcome: the ALSFRS-R total score as primary endpoint for ALS clinical trials

Minimal important change (MIC): a conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures

The minimum clinically important difference: which direction to take

Evidence of multidimensionality in the ALSFRS- R Scale: a critical appraisal on its measurement properties using Rasch analysis

Functional scales: Summary

导出引文

分享论文