Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: 's cross-sectional and longitudinal measurement properties. METHODS: 's reliability, construct validity, responsiveness, and estimate of meaningful change thresholds (MCTs). Other patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures included Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) in DT/AF symptoms, EORTC QLQ-C30, Brief Pain Inventory Short Form, and PROMIS Physical Function short-form 10a v2.0 plus 3 items. RESULTS: scales detected improvement over time. For the total symptom score, a 1.30-point decrease was estimated as the within-person MCT and a 1.00-point decrease as the between-group MCT. For the physical functioning impact score, estimated within- and between-group MCTs were 0.60-point and 0.50-point decreases, respectively. Few participants exhibited symptom worsening. CONCLUSION: was found to be reliable, valid, responsive, and interpretable as a clinical trial endpoint in the pooled sample of DT/AF patients. Estimated MCTs can be used to define responders and assess group-level differences in future, unblinded, efficacy analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND REGISTRATION DATE: NCT03785964; December 24, 2018.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gounder et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: