确定临床试验中异位性湿疹(recap)器械的最小重要变化。

Q3 Medicine
Skin health and disease Pub Date : 2024-10-26 eCollection Date: 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1002/ski2.470
Arabella Baker, Beth Stuart, Laura Howells, Eleanor J Mitchell, Kim S Thomas
{"title":"确定临床试验中异位性湿疹(recap)器械的最小重要变化。","authors":"Arabella Baker, Beth Stuart, Laura Howells, Eleanor J Mitchell, Kim S Thomas","doi":"10.1002/ski2.470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) is a patient-reported instrument designed to assess eczema control. There is a lack of evidence on the interpretability of change scores in clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To calculate the smallest detectable change (SDC) in RECAP and estimate the minimal important change (MIC) for RECAP using various calculation methods in three eczema clinical trial datasets.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, four anchor-based methods (within-person score change, between-patient score change, predictive modelling, receiver operating characteristic curve) and a distribution-based method (effect size) was used to determine the MIC of RECAP. The trial datasets involved children (0-12 years), young people (13-25 years) and adults (>25 years) with all eczema severities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 698 participants were included in this study. The SDC was between 1.74 and 1.80. For the anchor-based methods, the patient global assessment anchor provided MIC values ranging from 2.35 to 3.94 and the patient oriented eczema measure anchor yielded values between 1.11 and 3.62. The MIC for the distribution-based method ranged from 2.66 to 3.06, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The interpretability of RECAP was improved by establishing MIC values and the following thresholds are suggested for interpreting changes in RECAP scores: <2.0 points is possibly a measurement error; 2.0-2.9 points denotes a small improvement that may be clinically relevant; 3.0-3.9 points indicates an improvement that is likely to be clinically important and ≥4.0 points is highly likely to represent a clinically important change.</p>","PeriodicalId":74804,"journal":{"name":"Skin health and disease","volume":"4 6","pages":"e470"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11608894/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining the minimal important change of the recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) instrument in clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Arabella Baker, Beth Stuart, Laura Howells, Eleanor J Mitchell, Kim S Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ski2.470\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) is a patient-reported instrument designed to assess eczema control. There is a lack of evidence on the interpretability of change scores in clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To calculate the smallest detectable change (SDC) in RECAP and estimate the minimal important change (MIC) for RECAP using various calculation methods in three eczema clinical trial datasets.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, four anchor-based methods (within-person score change, between-patient score change, predictive modelling, receiver operating characteristic curve) and a distribution-based method (effect size) was used to determine the MIC of RECAP. The trial datasets involved children (0-12 years), young people (13-25 years) and adults (>25 years) with all eczema severities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 698 participants were included in this study. The SDC was between 1.74 and 1.80. For the anchor-based methods, the patient global assessment anchor provided MIC values ranging from 2.35 to 3.94 and the patient oriented eczema measure anchor yielded values between 1.11 and 3.62. The MIC for the distribution-based method ranged from 2.66 to 3.06, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The interpretability of RECAP was improved by establishing MIC values and the following thresholds are suggested for interpreting changes in RECAP scores: <2.0 points is possibly a measurement error; 2.0-2.9 points denotes a small improvement that may be clinically relevant; 3.0-3.9 points indicates an improvement that is likely to be clinically important and ≥4.0 points is highly likely to represent a clinically important change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74804,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Skin health and disease\",\"volume\":\"4 6\",\"pages\":\"e470\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11608894/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Skin health and disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ski2.470\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Skin health and disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ski2.470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:特应性湿疹回顾(Recap)是一种由患者报告的评估湿疹控制的仪器。临床试验中变化评分的可解释性缺乏证据。目的:在三个湿疹临床试验数据集中,采用不同的计算方法计算RECAP的最小可检测变化(SDC),并估计RECAP的最小重要变化(MIC)。方法:本研究采用基于锚点的四种方法(人内评分变化法、患者间评分变化法、预测模型法、受试者工作特征曲线法)和基于分布的方法(效应大小法)确定RECAP的MIC。试验数据集涉及所有湿疹严重程度的儿童(0-12岁)、年轻人(13-25岁)和成年人(10 -25岁)。结果:本研究共纳入698名受试者。SDC在1.74 - 1.80之间。对于基于锚点的方法,患者整体评估锚点提供的MIC值在2.35至3.94之间,患者导向湿疹测量锚点的MIC值在1.11至3.62之间。基于分布的方法的MIC分别为2.66 ~ 3.06。结论:通过建立MIC值提高了RECAP的可解释性,建议以下阈值来解释RECAP评分的变化:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determining the minimal important change of the recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) instrument in clinical trials.

Background: The Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) is a patient-reported instrument designed to assess eczema control. There is a lack of evidence on the interpretability of change scores in clinical trials.

Objectives: To calculate the smallest detectable change (SDC) in RECAP and estimate the minimal important change (MIC) for RECAP using various calculation methods in three eczema clinical trial datasets.

Methods: In this study, four anchor-based methods (within-person score change, between-patient score change, predictive modelling, receiver operating characteristic curve) and a distribution-based method (effect size) was used to determine the MIC of RECAP. The trial datasets involved children (0-12 years), young people (13-25 years) and adults (>25 years) with all eczema severities.

Results: A total of 698 participants were included in this study. The SDC was between 1.74 and 1.80. For the anchor-based methods, the patient global assessment anchor provided MIC values ranging from 2.35 to 3.94 and the patient oriented eczema measure anchor yielded values between 1.11 and 3.62. The MIC for the distribution-based method ranged from 2.66 to 3.06, respectively.

Conclusions: The interpretability of RECAP was improved by establishing MIC values and the following thresholds are suggested for interpreting changes in RECAP scores: <2.0 points is possibly a measurement error; 2.0-2.9 points denotes a small improvement that may be clinically relevant; 3.0-3.9 points indicates an improvement that is likely to be clinically important and ≥4.0 points is highly likely to represent a clinically important change.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信