Abstract
The responsiveness of a quality of life measure has received considerable attention in the literature. A two time-point (pre-/post-) study design is usually adopted to evaluate this property when a gold standard is not available. Among many indices, Cohen’s effect size and the standardized response mean (SRM) are usually computed. To interpret the results, researchers commonly appeal to an arbitrary criterion for both indices even though they are different by definition. In this paper, we demonstrate their close algebraic relationship and conceptual differences, showing that only the SRM is necessary to quantify responsiveness. To facilitate interpretation, we transform the SRM to the ‘probability of change’ with a value of 0.5 denoting null responsiveness and 1.0 perfect responsiveness. Simple confidence interval procedures are provided and evaluated. We also discuss the possibility of applying the results to the analysis of data from a two independent groups pre-/post- design. Two examples are provided.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A Garratt L Schmidt A Mackintosh Fitzpatrick (2002) ArticleTitleQuality of life measurements: Bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures Br Med J 324 1417–1421
DE Beaton C Bombardier JN Katz JG. Wright (2001) ArticleTitleA taxonomy for responsiveness J Clin Epidemiol 54 1204–1217 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00407-3 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2FgtlCrsw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11750189
CB Terwee FW Dekker WM Wiersinga MF Prummel PMM. Bossuyt (2003) ArticleTitleOn assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: Guidelines for instrument evaluation Qual Life Res 12 349–362 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s3ntFCjsw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle12797708
JA Husted RJ Cook VT Farewell DD. Gladman (2000) ArticleTitleMethods for assessing responsiveness: A critical review and recommendations J Clin Epidemiol 53 459–468 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3nsVShuw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10812317
RD Crosby RL Kolotkin GR. Willaims (2003) ArticleTitleDefining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life J Clin Epidemiol 56 395–407 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00044-1 Occurrence Handle12812812
G Guyatt S Walter G. Norman (1987) ArticleTitleMeasuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments J Chron Dis 40 171–178 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0021-9681(87)90069-5 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BiiC3sfhtFE%3D Occurrence Handle3818871
Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: Establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care; 38 (Suppl. II): 84–90.
LE Kazis JJ Anderson RF. Meenan (1989) ArticleTitleEffect sizes for interpreting changes in health status Med Care 27 S178–S189 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BiaC2Mfjt1U%3D Occurrence Handle2646488
MH Liang AH Fossel MG. Larson (1990) ArticleTitleComparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation Med Care 28 632–642 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By%2BA3cbktlQ%3D Occurrence Handle2366602
G Samsa D Edelman ML Rothman R Williams J Lipscomb D. Matchar (1999) ArticleTitleDetermining clinically important differences in health status measures Pharmacoeconomics 15 141–155 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3isFyitg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10351188
RA Deyo RM. Centor (1986) ArticleTitleAssessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: An analogy to diagnostic test performance J Chron Dis 39 897–906 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0021-9681(86)90038-X Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BiiD1cznsVI%3D Occurrence Handle2947907
J. Cohen (1977) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences Academic Press San Diego, CA
NS Jacobson P. Truax (1991) ArticleTitleClinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research J Consult Clin Psych 59 12–19 Occurrence Handle10.1037//0022-006X.59.1.12 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C287nsFQ%3D
RJ Ferguson MB Robinson M. Splaine (2002) ArticleTitleUse of the Reliable Change Index to evaluate clinical significance in SF-36 outcomes Qual Life Res 11 509–516 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1016350431190 Occurrence Handle12206571
JG Wright NL. Young (1997) ArticleTitleA comparison of different indices of responsiveness J Clin Epidemiol 50 239–246 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB2cnms1c%3D Occurrence Handle9120522
G Stucki MH Liang AH Fossel JN. Katz (1995) ArticleTitleRelative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis J Clin Epidemiol 48 1369–1378 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0895-4356(95)00054-2 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymD1Mrgsl0%3D Occurrence Handle7490600
DB Owenr KJ Craswell DL. Hanson (1964) ArticleTitleNonparametric upper confidence bounds for Pr(Y<X)and confidence limits for Pr(Y<X)when Xand Yare normal J Am Stat Assoc 59 906–924
DE Beaton S Hogg-Johnson C. Bombardier (1997) ArticleTitleEvaluating changes in health status: Reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders J Clin Epidemiol 50 79–93 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB3c%2Fos1A%3D Occurrence Handle9048693
MR Tuley CD Mulrow CA. McMahan (1991) ArticleTitleEstimating and testing an index of responsiveness and the relationship of the index to power J Clin Epidemiol 44 417–421 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0895-4356(91)90080-S Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C1cnhslw%3D Occurrence Handle2010785
LE. Daly (1998) ArticleTitleConfidence limits made easy: Interval estimation using a substitution method Am J Epidemiol 147 783–790 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c3htlSrsA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9554420
SD. Walter (2001) ArticleTitleNumber needed to treat (NNT): Estimation of a measure of clinic benefit Stat Med 20 3947–3962 Occurrence Handle10.1002/sim.1173 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2Fls1SltA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11782045
MAG Spranger CM Moinpour TJ Moynihan DL Patrick DA. Revicki (2002) ArticleTitleAssessing meaningful change in quality of life over time: A users’ guide for clinicians Mayo Clin Proc 77 561–571 Occurrence Handle12059127
J Sloan T Symonds D Vargas-Chanes B. Fridley (2003) ArticleTitlePractical guidelines for assessing the clinical significance of health-related quality of life changes in clinical trials Drug Inf J 37 23–31
KW Wyrwich M Bullinger N Aaronson RD Hays DL Patrick T. Symonds (2005) ArticleTitleEstimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes Qual Life Res 14 285–295 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s11136-004-0705-2 Occurrence Handle15892420
B. Thompson (2001) ArticleTitleSignificance, effect size, stepwise methods, and other issues: Strong arguments move the field J Exp Educ 70 80–93
Norman GR. Issues in the use of change scores in randomized studies. J Clin Epidemiol 42: 1097–1105.
H Brown R. Prescott (1999) Applied Mixed Models in Medicine Wiley New York
CE McCulloch SR. Searle (2001) Generalized, Linear, and Mixed Models Wiley New York
Faircolough DL. Design and Analysis of Quality of Life Studies in Clinical Trials. Chapman & Hall, 2002.
Casella G, Berger RL. Statistical Inference. 2nd ed. Duxbury, 2002.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zou, G.Y. Quantifying responsiveness of quality of life measures without an external criterion. Qual Life Res 14, 1545–1552 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-0027-4
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-0027-4