A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 143

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3098
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: Attempt to read property "Count" on bool

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 3100

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3100
Function: _error_handler

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Methodological approach for determining the Minimal Important Difference and Minimal Important Change scores for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Head and Neck Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-HN43) exemplified by the Swallowing scale. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to identify effective methods for determining the minimal important difference (MID) and minimal important change (MIC) in scores of the EORTC QLQ-HN43, a questionnaire for head and neck cancer patients.
  • An international study involving 503 patients from 28 hospitals assessed various methods including group comparisons and subjective ratings to gauge changes in health-related quality of life before and after treatment.
  • Results indicated that many traditional methods were unsuitable for determining MIDs and MICs, leading to the conclusion that distribution-based methods and subjective ratings are more effective options for future analyses.

Article Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore what methods should be used to determine the minimal important difference (MID) and minimal important change (MIC) in scores for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Head and Neck Cancer Module, the EORTC QLQ-HN43.

Methods: In an international multi-centre study, patients with head and neck cancer completed the EORTC QLQ-HN43 before the onset of treatment (t1), three months after baseline (t2), and six months after baseline (t3). The methods explored for determining the MID were: (1) group comparisons based on performance status; (2) 0.5 and 0.3 standard deviation and standard error of the mean. The methods examined for the MIC were patients' subjective change ratings and receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves, predictive modelling, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean. The EORTC QLQ-HN43 Swallowing scale was used to investigate these methods.

Results: From 28 hospitals in 18 countries, 503 patients participated. Correlations with the performance status were |r|< 0.4 in 17 out of 19 scales; hence, performance status was regarded as an unsuitable anchor. The ROC approach yielded an implausible MIC and was also discarded. The remaining approaches worked well and delivered MID values ranging from 10 to 14; the MIC for deterioration ranged from 8 to 16 and the MIC for improvement from - 3 to - 14.

Conclusions: For determining MIDs of the remaining scales of the EORTC QLQ-HN43, we will omit comparisons of groups based on the Karnofsky Performance Score. Other external anchors are needed instead. Distribution-based methods worked well and will be applied as a starting strategy for analyses. For the calculation of MICs, subjective change ratings, predictive modelling, and standard-deviation based approaches are suitable methods whereas ROC analyses seem to be inappropriate.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921167PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02939-6DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

head neck
12
neck cancer
12
eortc qlq-hn43
12
minimal difference
8
minimal change
8
scores european
8
european organisation
8
organisation treatment
8
treatment cancer
8
cancer head
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Notice

Message: fwrite(): Write of 34 bytes failed with errno=28 No space left on device

Filename: drivers/Session_files_driver.php

Line Number: 272

Backtrace:

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_write_close(): Failed to write session data using user defined save handler. (session.save_path: /var/lib/php/sessions)

Filename: Unknown

Line Number: 0

Backtrace: