SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Altman R, Brandt K, Hochberg M, Moskowitz R, Bellamy N, Bloch DA, et al. Design and conduct of clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis: recommendations from a task force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society. Results from a workshop. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1996; 4: 21743.
  • 2
    Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, Brooks P, Strand V, Tugwell P, et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis: consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol 1997; 24: 799802.
  • 3
    Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES): osteoarthritis section. Recommendations for the registration of drugs used in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 1996; 55: 5527.
  • 4
    Wright JG. Interpreting health-related quality of life scores: the simple rule of seven may not be so simple. Med Care 2003; 41: 5978.
  • 5
    Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002; 14: 10914.
  • 6
    Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 395407.
  • 7
    Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient-reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 2933.
  • 8
    Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K. Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 2002; 11: 20721.
  • 9
    Guyatt GH, Jaeschke RJ. Reassessing quality-of-life instruments in the evaluation of new drugs. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 12: 6216.
  • 10
    Schwartz AL, Meek PM, Nail LM, Fargo J, Lundquist M, Donofrio M, et al. Measurement of fatigue: determining minimally important clinical differences. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55: 23944.
  • 11
    Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 40715.
  • 12
    Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 817.
  • 13
    Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient-reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 347.
  • 14
    Tubach F, Dougados M, Falissard B, Baron G, Logeart I, Ravaud P. Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55: 52630.
  • 15
    Cohen J. The cost of dichotomization. Appl Psychol Meas 1983; 7: 24953.
  • 16
    Altman DG, Royston P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ 2006; 332: 1080.
  • 17
    Brozek JL, Guyatt GH, Schunemann HJ. How a well-grounded minimal important difference can enhance transparency of labelling claims and improve interpretation of a patient reported outcome measure. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 69.
  • 18
    Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Farrar JT, Haythornthwaite JA, Jensen MP, Katz NP, et al. Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 2005; 113: 919.
  • 19
    Tubach F, Ravaud P, Beaton D, Boers M, Bombardier C, Felson DT, et al. Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. J Rheumatol 2007; 34: 118893.
  • 20
    Tubach F, Wells GA, Ravaud P, Dougados M. Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: methodological issues. J Rheumatol 2005; 32: 20259.
  • 21
    Kvamme M, Kristiansen I, Lie E, Kvien T. Identification of cutpoints for acceptable health status and important improvement in patient-reported outcomes, in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2009; 37: 2631.
  • 22
    Tubach F, Pham T, Skomsvoll JF, Mikkelsen K, Bjorneboe O, Ravaud P, et al. Stability of the patient acceptable symptomatic state over time in outcome criteria in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55: 9603.
  • 23
    Ten Klooster PM, Drossaers-Bakker KW, Taal E, van de Laar MA. Patient-perceived satisfactory improvement (PPSI): interpreting meaningful change in pain from the patient's perspective. Pain 2006; 121: 1517.
  • 24
    Dougados M, Luo M, Maksymowych W, Chmiel J, Chen N, Wong R, et al. Evaluation of the patient acceptable symptom state as an outcome measure in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: data from a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59: 55360.
  • 25
    Maksymowych W, Gooch K, Dougados M, Wong R, Chen N, Kupper H, et al. Thresholds of patient-reported outcomes that define the patient acceptable symptom state in ankylosing spondylitis vary over time and by treatment and patient characteristics. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010; 62: 82634.
  • 26
    Maksymowych WP, Richardson R, Mallon C, van der Heijde D, Boonen A. Evaluation and validation of the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 1339.
  • 27
    Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, McShane DJ, Fries JF, Cooper NS, et al. The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1988; 31: 31524.
  • 28
    Van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis: a proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum 1984; 27: 3618.
  • 29
    Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D, Bloch D, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hand. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 160110.
  • 30
    Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D, Bloch D, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum 1991; 34: 50514.
  • 31
    Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis: classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Rheum 1986; 29: 103949.
  • 32
    Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1980; 23: 13745.
  • 33
    Garrett S, Jenkinson T, Kennedy LG, Whitelock H, Gaisford P, Calin A. A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing spondylitis: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index. J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 228691.
  • 34
    Calin A, Garrett S, Whitelock H, Kennedy LG, O'Hea J, Mallorie P, et al. A new approach to defining functional ability in ankylosing spondylitis: the development of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index. J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 22815.
  • 35
    Kelli DA, Joanne MJ, Jordan BR, Virginia BK. Validity, factor structure, and clinical relevance of the AUSCAN osteoarthritis hand index. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 54: 5516.
  • 36
    Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthitis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1995; 15: 183340.
  • 37
    Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I. Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 1983; 8: 1414.
  • 38
    Wells G, Anderson J, Beaton D, Bellamy N, Boers M, Bombardier C, et al. Minimal clinically important difference module: summary, recommendations, and research agenda. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 4524.
  • 39
    Wells G, Boers M, Shea B, Anderson J, Felson D, Johnson K, et al. MCID/low disease activity state workshop: low disease activity state in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 11101.
  • 40
    Tubach F, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P. The variability in MCII and PASS estimates did not have an impact on treatment effect estimates. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 7258.
  • 41
    Sprangers MA, de Regt EB, Andries F, van Agt HM, Bijl RV, de Boer JB, et al. Which chronic conditions are associated with better or poorer quality of life? J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 895907.
  • 42
    Bellamy N, Hendrikz J, Wilson C. Comparison of transformed visual analogue and native numerical rating scaled patient responses to the WOMAC Index [abstract]. Int Med J 2011; 41 Suppl: 23.
  • 43
    Wells G, Anderson J, Boers M, Felson D, Heiberg T, Hewlett S, et al. MCID/low disease activity state workshop: summary, recommendations, and research agenda. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 11158.