SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Living with chronic illness scale in Parkinson's disease: Longitudinal metric properties and meaningful change.

Parkinsonism Relat Disord · 2022-01-13

DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2022.01.007PMID: 35093852

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

AimTo analyze the responsiveness and interpretability of the Living with Chronic Illness Scale in patients with Parkinson's disease (LW-CI-PD).MethodsLongitudinal, international study, with a convenience sample of 153 PD Spanish and Latin-American patients assessed at baseline and one year later. The LW-CI-PD and other clinical measures were applied. For responsiveness, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test of differences, correlation of change between rating scales, standard error of difference, relative change, Cohen's effect size and standardized response mean of LW-CI-PD were computed. The minimally clinical important difference was calculated using anchor- (applying the Patient Global Impression of Severity) and distribution-based methods. A triangulation of interpretability indexes was performed to determine the range of the minimally clinical important difference values.ResultsThe LW-CI-PD scored 65.7 (11.7, range: 33-101) at baseline, and 68.6 (10.3, range: 33-102) one year later (p ConclusionsOur study suggest the LW-CI-PD is responsive to changes over time. The use of different methods for calculating the minimally clinical important difference allows to determine a range of the real change for the LW-CI-PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.