Normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scales

Jasvinder A. Singh, Daniel Satele, Suneetha Pattabasavaiah, Jan Craig Buckner, Jeff A Sloan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Single-item assessments have been the most often-used measures in National Cancer Institute (NCI) cancer control clinical trials, but normative data are not available. Our objective was to examine the normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scale for overall quality of life (QOL). Methods: We analyzed baseline data from 36 clinical trials and 6 observational studies with various populations, including healthy volunteers, cancer trial patients (patients with advanced incurable cancer or patients receiving treatment with curative intent) and hospice patients as well as their caregivers. The overall QOL LASA was rated 0 (as bad as it can be) to 10 (as good as it can be). We calculated the summary statistics and the proportion of patients reporting a clinically meaningful deficit (CMD) of a score equal to 5 or less on the 0-10 scale. Results: In total, for the collective sample of 9,295 individuals, the average overall QOL reported was 7.39 (SD = 2.11) with a markedly skewed distribution with roughly 17% reporting a score of 5 or below indicating a clinically significant deficit in overall QOL. Hospice patients report a much worse average score of 5.7 upon entry to hospice; hospice caregivers average 7.4. Cancer patients vary within these two extremes with most patients averaging in the 7's on the 0-10 scale (range, 0 to 10 p-value < 0.0001). Men and women's QOL distributions were virtually identical (with average of 7.6 vs. 7.5, p-value = 0.046). Overall QOL was weakly related to performance status with a Spearman correlation coefficient of -0.29 (p-value < 0.0001). Overall QOL was related to tumor response (p-value = 0.0094), i.e. patients with a full or partial response reported a CMD in 11.4% of cases compared to 14.4% among those with stable disease and 18.5% among those with disease progression. Data missingness was high for performance status and tumor response associations. Conclusions: This study provides the normative data for cancer patients and healthy volunteers for overall QOL using the LASA. These can serve as benchmarks for future studies and inform clinical practice decision-making.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number187
JournalHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 18 2014

Fingerprint

Quality of Life
Hospices
Neoplasms
Caregivers
Healthy Volunteers
Self-Assessment
Clinical Trials
Benchmarking
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Observational Studies
Disease Progression
Population

Keywords

  • LASA
  • Linear analog scale
  • Measurement
  • Patient-reported outcomes
  • PROs
  • QOL
  • Quality of life
  • Single item
  • Validation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scales. / Singh, Jasvinder A.; Satele, Daniel; Pattabasavaiah, Suneetha; Buckner, Jan Craig; Sloan, Jeff A.

In: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, Vol. 12, No. 1, 187, 18.12.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1fe00bdcd3b04d8bb1706b4bf26a306e,
title = "Normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scales",
abstract = "Background: Single-item assessments have been the most often-used measures in National Cancer Institute (NCI) cancer control clinical trials, but normative data are not available. Our objective was to examine the normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scale for overall quality of life (QOL). Methods: We analyzed baseline data from 36 clinical trials and 6 observational studies with various populations, including healthy volunteers, cancer trial patients (patients with advanced incurable cancer or patients receiving treatment with curative intent) and hospice patients as well as their caregivers. The overall QOL LASA was rated 0 (as bad as it can be) to 10 (as good as it can be). We calculated the summary statistics and the proportion of patients reporting a clinically meaningful deficit (CMD) of a score equal to 5 or less on the 0-10 scale. Results: In total, for the collective sample of 9,295 individuals, the average overall QOL reported was 7.39 (SD = 2.11) with a markedly skewed distribution with roughly 17{\%} reporting a score of 5 or below indicating a clinically significant deficit in overall QOL. Hospice patients report a much worse average score of 5.7 upon entry to hospice; hospice caregivers average 7.4. Cancer patients vary within these two extremes with most patients averaging in the 7's on the 0-10 scale (range, 0 to 10 p-value < 0.0001). Men and women's QOL distributions were virtually identical (with average of 7.6 vs. 7.5, p-value = 0.046). Overall QOL was weakly related to performance status with a Spearman correlation coefficient of -0.29 (p-value < 0.0001). Overall QOL was related to tumor response (p-value = 0.0094), i.e. patients with a full or partial response reported a CMD in 11.4{\%} of cases compared to 14.4{\%} among those with stable disease and 18.5{\%} among those with disease progression. Data missingness was high for performance status and tumor response associations. Conclusions: This study provides the normative data for cancer patients and healthy volunteers for overall QOL using the LASA. These can serve as benchmarks for future studies and inform clinical practice decision-making.",
keywords = "LASA, Linear analog scale, Measurement, Patient-reported outcomes, PROs, QOL, Quality of life, Single item, Validation",
author = "Singh, {Jasvinder A.} and Daniel Satele and Suneetha Pattabasavaiah and Buckner, {Jan Craig} and Sloan, {Jeff A}",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1186/s12955-014-0187-z",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
journal = "Health and Quality of Life Outcomes",
issn = "1477-7525",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scales

AU - Singh, Jasvinder A.

AU - Satele, Daniel

AU - Pattabasavaiah, Suneetha

AU - Buckner, Jan Craig

AU - Sloan, Jeff A

PY - 2014/12/18

Y1 - 2014/12/18

N2 - Background: Single-item assessments have been the most often-used measures in National Cancer Institute (NCI) cancer control clinical trials, but normative data are not available. Our objective was to examine the normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scale for overall quality of life (QOL). Methods: We analyzed baseline data from 36 clinical trials and 6 observational studies with various populations, including healthy volunteers, cancer trial patients (patients with advanced incurable cancer or patients receiving treatment with curative intent) and hospice patients as well as their caregivers. The overall QOL LASA was rated 0 (as bad as it can be) to 10 (as good as it can be). We calculated the summary statistics and the proportion of patients reporting a clinically meaningful deficit (CMD) of a score equal to 5 or less on the 0-10 scale. Results: In total, for the collective sample of 9,295 individuals, the average overall QOL reported was 7.39 (SD = 2.11) with a markedly skewed distribution with roughly 17% reporting a score of 5 or below indicating a clinically significant deficit in overall QOL. Hospice patients report a much worse average score of 5.7 upon entry to hospice; hospice caregivers average 7.4. Cancer patients vary within these two extremes with most patients averaging in the 7's on the 0-10 scale (range, 0 to 10 p-value < 0.0001). Men and women's QOL distributions were virtually identical (with average of 7.6 vs. 7.5, p-value = 0.046). Overall QOL was weakly related to performance status with a Spearman correlation coefficient of -0.29 (p-value < 0.0001). Overall QOL was related to tumor response (p-value = 0.0094), i.e. patients with a full or partial response reported a CMD in 11.4% of cases compared to 14.4% among those with stable disease and 18.5% among those with disease progression. Data missingness was high for performance status and tumor response associations. Conclusions: This study provides the normative data for cancer patients and healthy volunteers for overall QOL using the LASA. These can serve as benchmarks for future studies and inform clinical practice decision-making.

AB - Background: Single-item assessments have been the most often-used measures in National Cancer Institute (NCI) cancer control clinical trials, but normative data are not available. Our objective was to examine the normative data and clinically significant effect sizes for single-item numerical linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) scale for overall quality of life (QOL). Methods: We analyzed baseline data from 36 clinical trials and 6 observational studies with various populations, including healthy volunteers, cancer trial patients (patients with advanced incurable cancer or patients receiving treatment with curative intent) and hospice patients as well as their caregivers. The overall QOL LASA was rated 0 (as bad as it can be) to 10 (as good as it can be). We calculated the summary statistics and the proportion of patients reporting a clinically meaningful deficit (CMD) of a score equal to 5 or less on the 0-10 scale. Results: In total, for the collective sample of 9,295 individuals, the average overall QOL reported was 7.39 (SD = 2.11) with a markedly skewed distribution with roughly 17% reporting a score of 5 or below indicating a clinically significant deficit in overall QOL. Hospice patients report a much worse average score of 5.7 upon entry to hospice; hospice caregivers average 7.4. Cancer patients vary within these two extremes with most patients averaging in the 7's on the 0-10 scale (range, 0 to 10 p-value < 0.0001). Men and women's QOL distributions were virtually identical (with average of 7.6 vs. 7.5, p-value = 0.046). Overall QOL was weakly related to performance status with a Spearman correlation coefficient of -0.29 (p-value < 0.0001). Overall QOL was related to tumor response (p-value = 0.0094), i.e. patients with a full or partial response reported a CMD in 11.4% of cases compared to 14.4% among those with stable disease and 18.5% among those with disease progression. Data missingness was high for performance status and tumor response associations. Conclusions: This study provides the normative data for cancer patients and healthy volunteers for overall QOL using the LASA. These can serve as benchmarks for future studies and inform clinical practice decision-making.

KW - LASA

KW - Linear analog scale

KW - Measurement

KW - Patient-reported outcomes

KW - PROs

KW - QOL

KW - Quality of life

KW - Single item

KW - Validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924799397&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924799397&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12955-014-0187-z

DO - 10.1186/s12955-014-0187-z

M3 - Article

C2 - 25519478

AN - SCOPUS:84924799397

VL - 12

JO - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

JF - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

SN - 1477-7525

IS - 1

M1 - 187

ER -