ABSTRACT

Background: Despite wide usage of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery 10 (QPR), the minimum important difference (MID) for the measure has not been identified. Establishing the MID for the QPR is required in order to facilitate the interpretation of outcomes in clinical practice and the use of this scale in research, to measure meaningful change in people with psycho- sis.

Methods: Using an anchor-based method, data from four existing trials of interventions for people with psychosis (N = 681) were used to identify the MID for the QPR. Changes in QPR total scores between baseline and end of treatment were assessed for correspondence with several anchor measures which had established MIDs or face-value clinical meaning. A range of MID values were calculated.

Results: Based on anchor measures that were orientated towards service- user priorities, a within-person MID of 5 points and a between-group MID of 4 points are suggested. Results also indicated that the reliability and validity of the 15-item version of the QPR was high, which provides support for its use in clinical practice and research. Conclusions: Implications for future research and clinical practice are discussed.

摘要

背景：尽管关于恢复过程 10 (QPR) 的问卷被广泛使用，但尚未确定该措施的最小重要差异 (MID)。需要为 QPR 建立 MID，以促进临床实践中结果的解释以及该量表在研究中的使用，以衡量精神病患者的有意义的变化。

方法：使用基于锚点的方法，使用来自四项现有的精神病患者干预试验（N = 681）的数据来确定 QPR 的 MID。评估基线和治疗结束之间 QPR 总分的变化，以确定与已建立 MID 或面值临床意义的几种锚定措施的对应关系。计算了一系列 MID 值。

结果：基于面向服务用户优先级的锚定措施，建议人内 MID 为 5 分，组间 MID 为 4 分。结果还表明，15项式QPR的信效度较高，为其在临床实践和研究中的应用提供了支持。结论：讨论了对未来研究和临床实践的影响。