Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33594528›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2021

Identifying the minimal important difference in patient-reported outcome measures in the field of people with severe mental illness: a pre-post-analysis of the Illness Management and Recovery Programme.

Titus A A Beentjes, Steven Teerenstra, Hester Vermeulen, Peter J J Goossens, Maria W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden, Betsie G I van Gaal

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Transitions in depression: if, how, and when depressive symptoms return during and after discontinuing antidepressants.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Titus A A BeentjesRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. titus.beentjes@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5645-1068
Steven TeerenstraRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department for Health Evidence, Group Biostatistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hester VermeulenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Peter J J GoossensDimence Group Mental Health Care Centre, Deventer, The Netherlands.
Maria W G Nijhuis-van der SandenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Betsie G I van GaalRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLGhent University · BEHAN University of Applied Sciences · NL

Funding

ZonMw 520001001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeComplementary interventions for persons with severe mental illness (SMI) focus on both personal recovery and illness self-management. This paper aimed to identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) associated with the most relevant and meaningful change in persons with SMI who attended the Illness Management and Recovery Programme (IMR).

methodsThe effect of the IMR was measured with PROMs concerning recovery, illness self-management, burden of symptoms and quality of life (QoL). From the QoL measures, an anchor was chosen based on the most statistically significant correlations with the PROMs. Then, we estimated the minimal important difference (MID) for all PROMs using an anchor-based method supported by distribution-based methods. The PROM with the highest outcome for effect score divided by MID (the effect/MID index) was considered to be a measure of the most relevant and meaningful change.

resultsAll PROMs showed significant pre-post-effects. The QoL measure 'General Health Perception (Rand-GHP)' was identified as the anchor. Based on the anchor method, the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) showed the highest effect/MID index, which was supported by the distribution-based methods. Because of the modifying gender covariate, we stratified the MID calculations. In most MIDs, the MHRM showed the highest effect/MID indexes.

conclusionTaking into account the low sample size and the gender covariate, we conclude that the MHRM was capable of showing the most relevant and meaningful change as a result of the IMR in persons with SMI.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresHumansMaleMental DisordersQuality of LifeSelf-ManagementIllness management and recoveryMinimal important differenceRecoverySelf-managementSevere mental illness

Identifiers

PMID33594528
PMCPMC8178137
OpenAlexW3132028048

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.