Evaluation of the Dutch version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS): responsiveness and Minimally Important Change

被引:0
作者
I. N. Sierevelt
I. C. M. van Eekeren
D. Haverkamp
M. L. Reilingh
C. B. Terwee
G. M. M. J. Kerkhoffs
机构
[1] MC Slotervaart,Department of Orthopedics
[2] University of Amsterdam,Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Research Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center
[3] VU University Medical Center,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research
来源
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | 2016年 / 24卷
关键词
Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS); Questionnaires; PROM; Responsiveness; Minimally Important Change (MIC);
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
引用
收藏
页码:1339 / 1347
页数:8
相关论文
共 166 条
[1]  
Angst F(2011)The new COSMIN guidelines confront traditional concepts of responsiveness BMC Med Res Methodol 11 152-3199
[2]  
Beaton DE(2000)Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness Spine 25 3192-525
[3]  
Button G(2004)A meta-analysis of outcome rating scales in foot and ankle surgery: is there a valid, reliable, and responsive system? Foot Ankle Int 25 521-221
[4]  
Pinney S(2002)Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening Qual Life Res 11 207-1155
[5]  
Cella D(2012)Validation of foot and ankle outcome score for hallux valgus Foot Ankle Int 33 1145-546
[6]  
Hahn E(2007)Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods Spine 7 541-407
[7]  
Dineen K(2003)Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life J Clin Epidemiol 56 395-142
[8]  
Chen L(2007)Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach Qual Life Res 16 131-45
[9]  
Lyman S(2010)Three ways to quantify uncertainty in individually applied “minimally important change” values J Clin Epidemiol 63 37-906
[10]  
Do H(1986)Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance J Chronic Dis 39 897-67