The minimal clinically important difference of the scleroderma clinical trials consortium damage index.

Murray Baron, Dylan Hansen, Susanna Proudman, Wendy Stevens, Mianbo Wang, Mandana Nikpour
{"title":"The minimal clinically important difference of the scleroderma clinical trials consortium damage index.","authors":"Murray Baron, Dylan Hansen, Susanna Proudman, Wendy Stevens, Mianbo Wang, Mandana Nikpour","doi":"10.1177/23971983251327808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index is an index of global damage in systemic sclerosis. The objective of this study is to determine the minimal clinically important difference of the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group registry and the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study who completed Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index scores and the SF36v2 at baseline and the first full follow-up visit were studied. To calculate the minimal clinically important difference, an anchor question came from SF36v2: \"Compared to one year ago, how would you rate your health in general?.\" Options were: much better, somewhat better, about the same, somewhat worse and much worse. We use the \"somewhat worse\" or \"much worse\" categories to indicate those with any worsening. We used four anchor methods: receiver operating characteristic curve, change difference, regression analysis, and average change.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We studied 1672 patients. Mean disease duration was 11.4 ± 10.0 years; 62.5% had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Baseline mean Damage Index was 5.3 ± 4.2; mean change of Damage Index over 1 year was 0.9 ± 1.8 units. The calculated minimal clinically important difference values were 1 for receiver operating characteristic method, 0.625 for change difference, 0.1879 for regression analysis, and 1.37 for average change. Omitting the regression analysis method as an outlier, the mean of the other methods was 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The most appropriate minimal clinically important difference for the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index is a change of ⩾ 1.0 units in the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index as is already recognized by patients as a significant change after 1 year. This can be applied to group means as well as to individuals where an ordinal change is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":17036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scleroderma and Related Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"23971983251327808"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11948227/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scleroderma and Related Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23971983251327808","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index is an index of global damage in systemic sclerosis. The objective of this study is to determine the minimal clinically important difference of the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index.

Methods: Patients in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group registry and the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study who completed Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index scores and the SF36v2 at baseline and the first full follow-up visit were studied. To calculate the minimal clinically important difference, an anchor question came from SF36v2: "Compared to one year ago, how would you rate your health in general?." Options were: much better, somewhat better, about the same, somewhat worse and much worse. We use the "somewhat worse" or "much worse" categories to indicate those with any worsening. We used four anchor methods: receiver operating characteristic curve, change difference, regression analysis, and average change.

Results: We studied 1672 patients. Mean disease duration was 11.4 ± 10.0 years; 62.5% had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Baseline mean Damage Index was 5.3 ± 4.2; mean change of Damage Index over 1 year was 0.9 ± 1.8 units. The calculated minimal clinically important difference values were 1 for receiver operating characteristic method, 0.625 for change difference, 0.1879 for regression analysis, and 1.37 for average change. Omitting the regression analysis method as an outlier, the mean of the other methods was 1.

Conclusion: The most appropriate minimal clinically important difference for the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index is a change of ⩾ 1.0 units in the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index as is already recognized by patients as a significant change after 1 year. This can be applied to group means as well as to individuals where an ordinal change is required.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
硬皮病临床试验联合损伤指数的最小临床重要差异。
目的:硬皮病临床试验联盟损伤指数是系统性硬化症的整体损伤指标。本研究的目的是确定硬皮病临床试验联盟损伤指数的最小临床重要差异。方法:在加拿大硬皮病研究组注册和澳大利亚硬皮病队列研究中完成硬皮病临床试验联盟损伤指数评分和SF36v2基线和第一次完整随访的患者进行研究。为了计算最小的临床重要差异,SF36v2提出了一个锚定问题:“与一年前相比,你如何评价你的总体健康状况?”选项有:好多了,稍微好了,差不多,稍微差了,更差了。我们用“稍差”或“更差”来表示情况有任何恶化。采用4种锚点方法:受试者工作特征曲线法、变化差法、回归分析法和平均变化法。结果:我们研究了1672例患者。平均病程11.4±10.0年;62.5%为弥漫性皮肤系统性硬化症。基线平均损伤指数为5.3±4.2;1年内损伤指数平均变化0.9±1.8个单位。受试者工作特征法计算的最小临床重要差异值为1,变化差异值为0.625,回归分析计算的最小临床重要差异值为0.1879,平均变化值为1.37。剔除回归分析法作为离群值,其他方法的均值为1。结论:对于硬皮病临床试验联盟损伤指数来说,最合适的最小临床重要差异是硬皮病临床试验联盟损伤指数中小于1.0个单位的变化,因为患者已经认识到这是1年后的重大变化。这既可以应用于群体手段,也可以应用于需要进行顺序改变的个人手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Incidence and prevalence of juvenile SSc in the United States: An analysis by age group. Factors associated with eHealth literacy among people with systemic sclerosis: A Scleroderma Patient-centred Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort cross-sectional study. Pain and fatigue in systemic sclerosis: Practical strategies for non-pharmacological management. Criteria for defining and dating onset of organ system involvement in systemic sclerosis. Ultrasonographic assessment of digital ulcers in systemic sclerosis: Quantitative and qualitative insights for evaluation and follow-up.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1