ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2017
Responsiveness to Change and Minimally Important Differences of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Gastrointestinal Symptoms Scales.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Proton pump inhibitors for the prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced ulcers and dyspepsia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Minimal important change (MIC): a conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Gastrointestinal symptoms and the Mediterranean dietary pattern: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial in a population with increased cardiometabolic risk.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Pelvic floor distress inventory 20 and Wexner constipation scoring system responsiveness and minimal clinical importance difference in Persian women with functional constipation.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- A pilot study of dronabinol for the treatment of pain in sickle cell disease.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- Microbiome impacts quality of life in patients with endometrial cancer and benign gynecological conditions.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Investigating Nutrition and Supportive Care Needs in Esophageal and Gastric Cancer Survivors: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Meaningful differences in patient-reported outcome measurement scores in liver disease.Hepatology communications · 2025Article
- Positive affect longitudinally buffers the negative effect of health anxiety on gastrointestinal symptoms.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2024Article
- Article
- Dutch-Flemish translation and validation of the gastrointestinal symptom scales from the patient‑reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS)Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2023Article
- Peripheral Nervous, Hepatic, and Gastrointestinal Endpoints for AL Amyloidosis Clinical Trials: Report from the Amyloidosis Forum Multi-organ System Working Group.Advances in therapy · 2023Review
- Article
- Economic living standard and abdominal pain mediate the association between functional gastrointestinal disorders and depression or anxiety.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Article
- "If I Get Cured, My Whole Quality of Life Will Change": Patients' Anticipated and Actualized Benefits Following Cure from Chronic Hepatitis C.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Article
- Racial differences in user experiences and perceived value of electronic symptom monitoring in a cohort of black and white bladder and prostate cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Symptoms and functioning improve after chronic hepatitis C cure as assessed by the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale and PROMIS measures.Journal of viral hepatitis · 2021Article
- New Insights into Gastrointestinal Involvement in Late-Onset Pompe Disease: Lessons Learned from Bench and Bedside.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Patient-reported outcomes 12 months after hepatitis C treatment with direct-acting antivirals: Results from the PROP UP study.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe NIH-sponsored Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Gastrointestinal (GI) Symptoms scales were developed to assess patients' GI symptoms in clinical settings.
aimsTo assess responsiveness to change and provide minimally important difference (MID) estimates for the PROMIS GI Symptoms scales.
methodsA sample of 256 GI outpatients self-administered the eight PROMIS GI Symptoms scales (gastroesophageal reflux, disrupted swallowing, diarrhea, bowel incontinence/soilage, nausea and vomiting, constipation, belly pain, and gas/bloating/flatulence) at two visits. Patient self-reported and physician-reported assessments of the subjects' overall GI condition were employed as change anchors. In addition, we prospectively assessed change at both visits using a GI-symptom anchor, the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS). Responsiveness to change was assessed using F-statistics. The minimally changed group was those somewhat better or somewhat worse on the retrospective anchors and changing by one category on the modified GSRS (e.g., from slight to mild discomfort to moderate to moderately severe discomfort).
resultsResponsiveness to change was statistically significant for 6 of 8 PROMIS scales using the self-report GI anchor, 3 of 8 scales using the physician-reported anchor, and 5 of 5 scales using the corresponding GSRS scales as anchors. The MID estimates for scales for improvement and worsening were about 0.5-0.6 SD using the GSRS anchor and generally larger in magnitude than the change for the "about the same" group.
conclusionsThe responsiveness and MID estimates provided here for the PROMIS GI Symptoms scales can aid in scale score interpretation in clinical trials and observational studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.