Recommended Methods for Determining Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for Patient Reported Outcomes

Published in: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, v. 61, No. 2, Feb. 2008, p. 102-109

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2008

by Dennis A. Revicki, Ron D. Hays, David Cella, Jeff A. Sloan

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.sciencedirect.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to summarize recommendations on methods for evaluating responsiveness and minimal important difference (MID) for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The authors review, summarize, and integrate information on issues and methods for evaluating responsiveness and determining MID estimates for PRO measures. Recommendations are made on best-practice methods for evaluating responsiveness and MID. RESULTS: The MID for a PRO instrument is not an immutable characteristic, but may vary by population and context, and no one MID may be valid for all study applications. MID estimates should be based on multiple approaches and triangulation of methods. Anchor-based methods applying various relevant patient-rated, clinician-rated, and disease-specific variables provide primary and meaningful estimates of an instrument's MID. Results for the PRO measures from clinical trials can also provide insight into observed effects based on treatment comparisons and should be used to help determine MID. Distribution-based methods can support estimates from anchor-based approaches and can be used in situations where anchor-based estimates are unavailable. CONCLUSION: The authors recommend that the MID is based primarily on relevant patient-based and clinical anchors, with clinical trial experience used to further inform understanding of MID.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.