IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Suzanne Reeves, Josef Mahdi, Matthew Appleby, Olga Zubko, Teresa Lee, Julie A Barber, Kathy Y Liu, John-Paul Taylor, Emily J Henderson, Anette Schrag, Robert Howard, Rimona S Weil
{"title":"Minimal clinically important differences for treatment of hallucinations in Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies.","authors":"Suzanne Reeves, Josef Mahdi, Matthew Appleby, Olga Zubko, Teresa Lee, Julie A Barber, Kathy Y Liu, John-Paul Taylor, Emily J Henderson, Anette Schrag, Robert Howard, Rimona S Weil","doi":"10.1017/S0033291725000534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hallucinations are common and distressing symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Treatment response in clinical trials is measured using validated questionnaires, including the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms-Hallucinations (SAPS-H) and University of Miami PD Hallucinations Questionnaire (UM-PDHQ). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has not been determined for either scale. This study aimed to estimate a range of MCIDs for SAPS-H and UM-PDHQ using both consensus-based and statistical approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Delphi survey was used to seek opinions of researchers, clinicians, and people with lived experience. We defined consensus as agreement ≥75%. Statistical approaches used blinded data from the first 100 PD participants in the Trial for Ondansetron as Parkinson's Hallucinations Treatment (TOP HAT, NCT04167813). The distribution-based approach defined the MCID as 0.5 of the standard deviation of change in scores from baseline at 12 weeks. The anchor-based approach defined the MCID as the average change in scores corresponding to a 1-point improvement in clinical global impression-severity scale (CGI-S).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one researchers and clinicians contributed to three rounds of the Delphi survey and reached consensus that the MCID was 2 points on both scales. Sixteen experts with lived experience reached the same consensus. Distribution-defined MCIDs were 2.6 points for SAPS-H and 1.3 points for UM-PDHQ, whereas anchor-based MCIDs were 2.1 and 1.3 points, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We used triangulation from multiple methodologies to derive the range of MCID estimates for the two rating scales, which was between 2 and 2.7 points for SAPS-H and 1.3 and 2 points for UM-PDHQ.</p>","PeriodicalId":20891,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Medicine","volume":"55 ","pages":"e93"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291725000534","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:幻觉是帕金森病(PD)常见的令人痛苦的症状。临床试验中的治疗反应是通过有效问卷进行测量的,包括阳性症状-幻觉评估量表(SAPS-H)和迈阿密大学帕金森病幻觉问卷(UM-PDHQ)。这两种量表的最小临床重要差异(MCID)均未确定。本研究旨在采用基于共识的方法和统计方法估算 SAPS-H 和 UM-PDHQ 的 MCID 范围:方法:采用德尔菲调查法征求研究人员、临床医生和有生活经验者的意见。我们将共识定义为同意率≥75%。统计方法使用了 "昂丹司琼治疗帕金森幻觉试验"(TOP HAT,NCT04167813)中前 100 名帕金森病参与者的盲法数据。基于分布的方法将 MCID 定义为 12 周时与基线相比评分变化标准差的 0.5。基于锚的方法将 MCID 定义为临床总体印象-严重程度量表(CGI-S)改善 1 分所对应的平均分数变化:51名研究人员和临床医生参与了三轮德尔菲调查,并就两个量表的MCID均为2分达成了共识。16 位具有生活经验的专家也达成了同样的共识。SAPS-H的分布定义MCID为2.6分,UM-PDHQ为1.3分,而基于锚的MCID分别为2.1分和1.3分:我们采用多种方法进行三角测量,得出了两种评分量表的 MCID 估计值范围,SAPS-H 为 2 至 2.7 分,UM-PDHQ 为 1.3 至 2 分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Minimal clinically important differences for treatment of hallucinations in Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies.

Background: Hallucinations are common and distressing symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Treatment response in clinical trials is measured using validated questionnaires, including the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms-Hallucinations (SAPS-H) and University of Miami PD Hallucinations Questionnaire (UM-PDHQ). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has not been determined for either scale. This study aimed to estimate a range of MCIDs for SAPS-H and UM-PDHQ using both consensus-based and statistical approaches.

Methods: A Delphi survey was used to seek opinions of researchers, clinicians, and people with lived experience. We defined consensus as agreement ≥75%. Statistical approaches used blinded data from the first 100 PD participants in the Trial for Ondansetron as Parkinson's Hallucinations Treatment (TOP HAT, NCT04167813). The distribution-based approach defined the MCID as 0.5 of the standard deviation of change in scores from baseline at 12 weeks. The anchor-based approach defined the MCID as the average change in scores corresponding to a 1-point improvement in clinical global impression-severity scale (CGI-S).

Results: Fifty-one researchers and clinicians contributed to three rounds of the Delphi survey and reached consensus that the MCID was 2 points on both scales. Sixteen experts with lived experience reached the same consensus. Distribution-defined MCIDs were 2.6 points for SAPS-H and 1.3 points for UM-PDHQ, whereas anchor-based MCIDs were 2.1 and 1.3 points, respectively.

Conclusions: We used triangulation from multiple methodologies to derive the range of MCID estimates for the two rating scales, which was between 2 and 2.7 points for SAPS-H and 1.3 and 2 points for UM-PDHQ.

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
Psychological Medicine
Psychological Medicine 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
711
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Now in its fifth decade of publication, Psychological Medicine is a leading international journal in the fields of psychiatry, related aspects of psychology and basic sciences. From 2014, there are 16 issues a year, each featuring original articles reporting key research being undertaken worldwide, together with shorter editorials by distinguished scholars and an important book review section. The journal''s success is clearly demonstrated by a consistently high impact factor.
×
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