Sign up & Download
Sign in

Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation.

by Geoffrey R Norman, Jeff A Sloan, Kathleen W Wyrwich
Medical care ()

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A number of studies have computed the minimally important difference (MID) for health-related quality of life instruments. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is consistency in the magnitude of MID estimates from different instruments. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that computed an MID and contained sufficient information to compute an effect size (ES). Thirty-eight studies fulfilled the criteria, resulting in 62 ESs. RESULTS: For all but 6 studies, the MID estimates were close to one half a SD (mean = 0.495, SD = 0.155). There was no consistent relationship with factors such as disease-specific or generic instrument or the number of response options. Negative changes were not associated with larger ESs. Population-based estimation procedures and brief follow-up were associated with smaller ESs, and acute conditions with larger ESs. An explanation for this consistency is that research in psychology has shown that the limit of people's ability to discriminate over a wide range of tasks is approximately 1 part in 7, which is very close to half a SD. CONCLUSION: In most circumstances, the threshold of discrimination for changes in health-related quality of life for chronic diseases appears to be approximately half a SD.

Cite this document (BETA)

Readership Statistics

110 Readers on Mendeley
by Discipline
 
 
 
by Academic Status
 
25% Ph.D. Student
 
14% Post Doc
 
11% Researcher (at an Academic Institution)
by Country
 
7% United States
 
4% United Kingdom
 
3% Canada

Sign up today - FREE

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research. Learn more

  • All your research in one place
  • Add and import papers easily
  • Access it anywhere, anytime

Start using Mendeley in seconds!

Already have an account? Sign in