Improving the interpretation of quality of life evidence in meta-analyses: the application of minimal important difference units
- PMID: 20937092
- PMCID: PMC2959099
- DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-116
Improving the interpretation of quality of life evidence in meta-analyses: the application of minimal important difference units
Abstract
Systematic reviews of randomized trials that include measurements of health-related quality of life potentially provide critical information for patient and clinicians facing challenging health care decisions. When, as is most often the case, individual randomized trials use different measurement instruments for the same construct (such as physical or emotional function), authors typically report differences between intervention and control in standard deviation units (so-called "standardized mean difference" or "effect size"). This approach has statistical limitations (it is influenced by the heterogeneity of the population) and is non-intuitive for decision makers. We suggest an alternative approach: reporting results in minimal important difference units (the smallest difference patients experience as important). This approach provides a potential solution to both the statistical and interpretational problems of existing methods.
Figures
References
-
- Patient Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Instruments Database Accessed September 27, 2010. http://www.proqolid.org/proqolid/search__1/pathology_disease?pty=1924
-
- Higgins JPT, Green S, (editors) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
-
- Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. second. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988. p. 25.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources