Interpreting Change in Scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments
Published 2015 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Interpreting Change in Scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science
Volume 50, Issue 1, Pages 22-29
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Online
2015-12-31
DOI
10.1177/2168479015622667
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Application of the Itch Severity Score in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: Clinically important difference and responder analyses
- (2014) Carla M. Mamolo et al. JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGICAL TREATMENT
- Creating meaningful cut-scores for Neuro-QOL measures of fatigue, physical functioning, and sleep disturbance using standard setting with patients and providers
- (2014) Karon F. Cook et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Setting standards for severity of common symptoms in oncology using the PROMIS item banks and expert judgment
- (2014) David Cella et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- What is a clinically relevant change on the HIT-6 questionnaire? An estimation in a primary-care population of migraine patients
- (2013) Antonia FH Smelt et al. CEPHALALGIA
- Validation of the SF-36 in patients with endometriosis
- (2013) Donald E. Stull et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes
- (2013) Joseph C Cappelleri et al. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH
- Methods for interpreting change over time in patient-reported outcome measures
- (2012) K. W. Wyrwich et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Minimally important differences were estimated for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients
- (2011) Kathleen J. Yost et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Responder Analyses—A PhRMA Position Paper
- (2011) Tom Uryniak et al. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research
- Interpreting patient-reported outcome results: US FDA guidance and emerging methods
- (2011) Lori D McLeod et al. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
- A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods
- (2011) Madeleine T King Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
- Defining a minimal clinically important difference for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain measured on a visual analog scale: analyses of two placebo-controlled, randomized trials
- (2010) Christoph Gerlinger et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
- Estimating importance weights for the IWQOL-Lite using conjoint analysis
- (2010) A. Brett Hauber et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes
- (2007) Dennis Revicki et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Publish scientific posters with Peeref
Peeref publishes scientific posters from all research disciplines. Our Diamond Open Access policy means free access to content and no publication fees for authors.
Learn MoreAdd your recorded webinar
Do you already have a recorded webinar? Grow your audience and get more views by easily listing your recording on Peeref.
Upload Now