Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37402086›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2023

Establishing clinically meaningful within-individual improvement thresholds for eight patient-reported outcome measures in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Nupur Greene, Stéphane Quéré, Denise P Bury, Flora Mazerolle, Manal M'Hari, Angély Loubert, Antoine Regnault, Keiko Higuchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Appropriate use of meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) thresholds in Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

8 authors.

Nupur GreeneSanofi, 450 Water Street, Cambridge, MA, USA. Nupur.Greene@sanofi.com.
Stéphane QuéréModus Outcomes, A Division of THREAD, Lyon, France.
Denise P BurySanofi, 450 Water Street, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Flora MazerolleModus Outcomes, A Division of THREAD, Lyon, France.
Manal M'HariModus Outcomes, A Division of THREAD, Lyon, France.
Angély LoubertModus Outcomes, A Division of THREAD, Lyon, France.
Antoine RegnaultModus Outcomes, A Division of THREAD, Lyon, France.
Keiko HiguchiSanofi, 450 Water Street, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs disease-modifying therapies do not reverse the course of multiple sclerosis (MS), assessment of therapeutic success involves documenting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) concerning health-related quality of life, disease and treatment-related symptoms, and the impact of symptoms on function. Interpreting PRO data involves going beyond statistical significance to calculate within-patient meaningful change scores. These thresholds are needed for each PRO in order to fully interpret the PRO data. This analysis of PRO data from the PROMiS AUBAGIO study, which utilized 8 PRO instruments in teriflunomide-treated relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients, was designed to estimate clinically meaningful within-individual improvement thresholds in the same manner, for 8 PRO instruments.

resultsThe analytical approach followed a triangulation exercise that considered results from anchor- and distribution-based methods and graphical representations of empirical cumulative distribution functions in PRO scores in groups defined by anchor variables. Data from 8 PRO instruments (MSIS-29 v2, FSMC, MSPS, MSNQ, TSQM v1.4, PDDS, HRPQ-MS v2, and HADS) were assessed from 434 RRMS patients. For MSIS-29 v2, FSMC, MSPS, and MSNQ total scores, available anchor variables enabled both anchor- and distribution-based methods to be applied. For instruments with no appropriate anchor available, distribution-based methods were applied. A recommended value for meaningful within-individual improvement was defined by comparing mean change in PRO scores between participants showing improvement of one or two categories in the anchor variable or those showing no change. A "lower bound" estimate was calculated using distribution-based methods. An improvement greater than the lower-bound estimate was considered "clinically meaningful".

conclusionThis analysis produced estimates for assessing meaningful within-individual improvements for 8 PRO instruments used in MS studies. These estimates should be useful for interpreting scores and communicating study results and should facilitate decision-making by regulatory and healthcare authorities where these 8 PROs are commonly employed.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisMultiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-RemittingCrotonatesHumansHydroxybutyratesNitrilesPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeResearch DesignToluidinesCrotonatesHydroxybutyratesNitrilesteriflunomideToluidinesPatient-reported outcome (PRO)Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)TeriflunomideValidationWithin-patient change threshold

Identifiers

PMID37402086
PMCPMC10319693

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.