The responsiveness of goal attainment scaling using just one goal in controlled clinical trials: an exploratory analysis

6Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is an individualized outcome measure that allows the setting of personalized treatment goals. We compared the responsiveness of GAS when individuals set only one goal instead of the recommended three or more goals. Methods: We conducted exploratory analyses on data from two randomized controlled trials: the Video-Imaging Synthesis of Treating Alzheimer’s Disease (VISTA) (n = 130); and the Mobile Geriatric Assessment Team (MGAT) (n = 265). Independent t-tests and standardized response means (SRMs) were used to assess responsiveness of one- vs. multiple-goal GAS. Results: In VISTA, clinician-rated multiple-goal GAS detected higher goal attainment in the intervention group (p = 0.01; SRM = 0.48). One-goal GAS, whether rated by patients or by clinicians, did not detect differences in goal attainment between groups (patient: p = 0.56, SRM = 0.10; clinician: p = 0.10, SRM = 0.29). In MGAT, multiple-goal GAS (outcome goals: p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McGarrigle, L., & Rockwood, K. (2020). The responsiveness of goal attainment scaling using just one goal in controlled clinical trials: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00196-8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free