Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37051543›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023

Exploration of the methods of establishing the minimum clinical important difference based on anchors and their applications in the quality of life measurement scale QLICP-BR (V2.0) for breast cancer.

Xuan Zhou, Yuxi Liu, Jianfeng Tan, Liren Hu, Huanwei Chen, Chonghua Wan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. 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
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xuan ZhouKey Laboratory for Quality of Life and Psychological assessment and Intervention, School of Humanities and Management, Research Center for Quality of Life and Applied Psychology, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Yuxi LiuKey Laboratory for Quality of Life and Psychological assessment and Intervention, School of Humanities and Management, Research Center for Quality of Life and Applied Psychology, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Jianfeng TanKey Laboratory for Quality of Life and Psychological assessment and Intervention, School of Humanities and Management, Research Center for Quality of Life and Applied Psychology, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Liren HuSchool of Public Health, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Huanwei ChenOncology Department, Central Hospital of Guangdong Nongken, Zhanjiang, China.
Chonghua WanKey Laboratory for Quality of Life and Psychological assessment and Intervention, School of Humanities and Management, Research Center for Quality of Life and Applied Psychology, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Guangdong Medical College · CNCentral People's Hospital of Zhanjiang · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The measurement of the quality of life (QOL) in patients with breast cancer can evaluate the therapeutic effects of medical treatments and help to provide reference for clinical decisions. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) can be better used in clinical interpretation than the traditional statistical significance. Based on the anchors, a variety of ways including traditional and updated anchor-based methods were used to explore most suitable MCID, so that to find better interpretation on scores of the scale QLICP-BR(V2.0) (Quality of Life Instruments for Cancer Patients-Breast cancer). Methods: According to the investigation data of breast cancer patients before and after treatment, the most relevant indicators in various domains of QLICP-BR (V2.0) was found as an anchor to statistically analyze the value of MCID, and three analysis methods of anchors were used: Traditional anchor-based method, ROC curve method, multiple linear regression model analysis. Anchors are divided into four standards according to the degree of change in the treatment effect: one grade difference (Standard A), at least one grade difference (Standard B), one grade better (Standard C), better (Standard D). The final MCID value is selected from different statistical methods and classification standards that are most suitable for clinicians to use. Results: Using Q29 of the EORTC QLQ-C30 as an anchor has the highest correlation with each domain of QLICP. The order of magnitude of MCID values among the four standard groups is: standard A< Standard C< Standard B< Standard D. The MCID value obtained by the ROC curve method is the most stable and is least affected by the sample size, and the MCID value obtained by the multiple linear regression model is the least. After comparisons and discussions, Standard C in the multiple linear regression model is used to determine the final MCID, which is the closest to other methods. After integer the MCID values of Physical domain (PHD), Psychological domain (PSD), Social domain (SOD), Common symptoms and side effect domain (SSD), Core/general module (CGD), Specific domain (SPD), Total score(TOT) can be taken as 15,10, 10, 11, 10, 9 and 9, respectively. Conclusion: In the evaluation of the QOL of breast cancer patients, although the results of MCID values produced by different methods are different, the results are relatively close. The anchor-based methods make the results of MCID more clinically interpretable by introducing clinical variables, and clinicians and researchers can choose the appropriate method according to the research purpose.

Indexed as

anchor-based methodsbreast cancerminimum clinically important differencemultiple linear regression modelQLICP-BR(V2.0)quality of lifeROC curve method

Identifiers

PMID37051543
PMCPMC10083364
OpenAlexW4361011347

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.