ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2018
Longitudinal construct validity of the minimum data set health status index.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Assessment of the Longitudinal Construct Validity of the Pain Behavioral Scale (PaBS) in a Saudi Population with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Preliminary Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Self-medication practices during the COVID-19 pandemic among the adult population in Peru: A cross-sectional survey.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Minimum Data Set Health Status Index (MDS-HSI) is a generic, preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measure derived by mapping items from the Resident Assessment Instrument - Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) assessment onto the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 classification system. While the validity of the MDS-HSI has been examined in cross-sectional settings, the longitudinal validity has not been explored. The objective of this study was to investigate the longitudinal construct validity of the MDS-HSI in a home care population.
methodsThis study utilized a retrospective cohort of home care patients in the Hamilton-Niagara-Haldimand-Brant health region of Ontario, Canada with at least two RAI-MDS Home Care assessments between January 2010 and December 2014. Convergent validity was assessed by calculating Spearman rank correlations between the change in MDS-HSI and changes in six validated indices of health domains that can be calculated from the RAI-MDS assessment. Known-groups validity was investigated by fitting multivariable linear regression models to estimate the mean change in MDS-HSI associated with clinically important changes in the six health domain indices and 15 disease symptoms from the RAI-MDS Home Care assessment, controlling for age and sex.
resultsThe cohort contained 25,182 patients with two RAI-MDS Home Care assessments. Spearman correlations between the MDS-HSI change and changes in the health domain indices were all statistically significant and in the hypothesized small to moderate range [0.1 < ρ < 0.5]. Clinically important changes in all of the health domain indices and 13 of the 15 disease symptoms were significantly associated with clinically important changes in the MDS-HSI.
conclusionsThe findings of this study support the longitudinal construct validity of the MDS-HSI in home care populations. In addition to evaluating changes in HRQOL among home care patients in clinical research, economic evaluation, and health technology assessment, the MDS-HSI may be used in system-level applications using routinely collected population-level data.
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.