Skip to main content

Table 3 Responsiveness of Depression Measures by Retrospective Global Rating of Change for Mood

From: Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials

Depression change

Mean SRM

CAMEO

SPACE

SSM

Score change*

SRM†

(95% CI)

P‡

Score change*

SRM†

(95% CI)

P‡

Score change*

SRM†

(95% CI)

P‡

PROMIS 4-item

    

.003

   

.002

   

.87

 Better

.35

2.71

.37

(.16, .58)

.217

3.27

.41

(.22, .60)

.086

2.09

.27

(.10, .45)

1.00

 Same

.17

0.37

.07

(− .23, .44)

–

1.04

.15

(− .03, .33)

–

2.08

.29

(.08, .52)

–

 Worse

‒.35

− 3.94

− .58

(− 1.2, − .08)

.110

− 3.78

− .64

(− 1.1, − .28)

.050

1.14

.18

(− .28, .69)

.87

PROMIS 6-item

    

.0007

   

.018

   

.71

 Better

.39

3.57

.47

(.26, .70)

.102

3.68

.43

(.24, .61)

.113

2.28

.27

(.11, .45)

.94

 Same

.19

0.70

.13

(− .18, .51)

–

1.41

.18

(.00, .37)

–

1.89

.25

(.03, .47)

–

 Worse

‒.24

− 3.81

− .52

(− 1.2, − .01)

.089

− 2.03

− .30

(− .82, .22)

.269

0.72

.11

(− .35, .61)

.83

PROMIS 8-item

    

.0007

   

.016

   

.55

 Better

.41

3.59

.49

(.27, .70)

.135

3.71

.43

(.25, .62)

.112

2.33

.30

(.13, .46)

.99

 Same

.21

0.90

.16

(− .15, .53)

–

1.45

.19

(.01, .38)

–

2.15

.29

(.08, .50)

–

 Worse

‒.25

− 3.91

− .51

(− 1.1, .02)

.066

− 2.10

− .30

(− .80, .23)

.239

0.30

.05

(− .41, .55)

.60

PROMIS SF

    

.0005

   

.014

   

.63

 Better

.42

3.82

.51

(.29, .74)

.085

4.10

.48

(.30, .65)

.096

2.40

.28

(.11, .45)

.85

 Same

.19

0.75

.13

(− .18, .48)

–

1.71

.22

(.04, .41)

–

1.78

.23

(.02, .45)

–

 Worse

‒.23

− 3.93

− .51

(− 1.2, .03)

.085

− 1.82

− .27

(− .84, .27)

.258

0.63

.10

(− .36, .60)

.84

PROMIS average

             

 Better

.39

 

.46

   

.44

   

.28

  

 Same

.19

 

.12

   

.19

   

.27

  

 Worse

‒.27

 

− .53

   

− .38

   

.11

  

PHQ-9

    

.0001

   

.007

   

.009

 Better

.55

3.35

.72

(.50, .97)

.002

1.98

.53

(.32, .74)

.127

2.16

.41

(.26, .57)

.385

 Same

.19

0.07

.02

(− .30, .34)

–

0.93

.26

(.07, .45)

–

1.22

.26

(.05, .48)

–

 Worse

‒.28

− 1.28

− .23

(− .65, .25)

.601

− 1.20

− .30

(− 1.3, .26)

.111

− 1.50

− .31

(− .74, .15)

.082

PHQ-2

    

.077

   

.042

   

.088

 Better

.38

0.76

.42

(.21, .65)

.250

0.61

.48

(.29, .66)

.203

0.44

.25

(.08, .42)

.804

 Same

.18

0.24

.16

(− .15, .50)

–

0.28

.22

(.03, .42)

–

0.28

.17

(− .06, .41)

–

 Worse

‒.20

− 0.11

− .10

(− .59, .39)

.735

− 0.29

− .17

(− .81, .41)

.310

− 0.50

− .34

(− .97, .12)

.183

SF-36 Mental

    

.042

        

 Better

 

7.92

.43

(.23, .63)

.038

        

 Same

 

− 1.10

− .09

(− .45, .22)

–

        

 Worse

 

1.94

.06

(− .50, .48)

.836

        
  1. Total N (better, same, worse) with baseline and follow-up data in CAMEO = 138 (79, 41, 18); in SPACE = 224 (89, 120, 15); and in SSM = 238 (136, 82, 20)
  2. * Score change = baseline—follow-up (Positive score: improvement, negative score: worsening)
  3. †SRM = (baseline − follow-up)/SD change score;
  4. ‡Bolded p-values are from omnibus ANOVA tests comparing change scores among the three groups. Other p values were derived from pairwise comparisons of change scores between better vs. same, same vs. worse, and better vs. worse, and were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Tukey–Kramer procedure. Since all better vs. worse pairwise comparisons were significant when the omnibus test was significant, only better vs. same and same vs. worse p-values are reported in this table
Back to article page

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us