Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30001999›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2018

Measurement of Symptom Change Following Web-Based Psychotherapy: Statistical Characteristics and Analytical Methods for Measuring and Interpreting Change.

Eyal Karin, Blake F Dear, Gillian Z Heller, Milena Gandy, Nickolai Titov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eyal KarineCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6152-9704
Blake F DeareCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9324-3092
Gillian Z HellerDepartment of Statistics, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1270-1499
Milena GandyeCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2161-3298
Nickolai TitoveCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7268-729X
Macquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate measurement of treatment-related change is a key part of psychotherapy research and the investigation of treatment efficacy. For this reason, the ability to measure change with accurate and valid methods is critical for psychotherapy.

objectiveThe aims of this study were to (1) explore the underlying characteristics of depressive symptom change, measured with the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), following psychotherapy, and (2) compare the suitability of different ways to measure and interpret symptom change. A treatment sample of Web-based psychotherapy participants (n=1098) and a waitlist sample (n=96) were used to (1) explore the statistical characteristics of depressive symptom change, and (2) compare the suitability of two common types of change functions: linear and proportional change.

methodsThese objectives were explored using hypotheses that tested (1) the relationship between baseline symptoms and the rate of change, (2) the shape of symptom score distribution following treatment, and (3) measurement error associated with linear and proportional measurement models.

resultsFindings demonstrated that (1) individuals with severe depressive baseline symptoms had greater reductions in symptom scores than individuals with mild baseline symptoms (11.4 vs 3.7); however, as a percentage measurement, change remained similar across individuals with mild, moderate, or severe baseline symptoms (50%-55%); (2) positive skewness was observed in PHQ-9 score distributions following treatment; and (3) models that measured symptom change as a proportional function resulted in greater model fit and reduced measurement error (<30%).

conclusionsThis study suggests that symptom scales, sharing an implicit feature of score bounding, are associated with a proportional function of change. Selecting statistics that overlook this proportional change (eg, Cohen d) is problematic and leads to (1) artificially increased estimates of change with higher baseline symptoms, (2) increased measurement error, and (3) confounded estimates of treatment efficacy and clinical change. Implications, limitations, and idiosyncrasies from these results are discussed.

Indexed as

clinical measurementpsychotherapeutic changesymptom changesymptom scalestreatment evaluation

Identifiers

PMID30001999
PMCPMC6062691
OpenAlexW2801744434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.