scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

J. Campbell

Bio: J. Campbell is an academic researcher from University of Western Ontario. The author has contributed to research in topics: WOMAC & Clinical trial. The author has an hindex of 23, co-authored 42 publications receiving 8326 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: WOMAC is a disease-specific purpose built high performance instrument for evaluative research in osteoarthritis clinical trials and fulfil conventional criteria for face, content and construct validity, reliability, responsiveness and relative efficiency.
Abstract: Within the context of a double blind randomized controlled parallel trial of 2 nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, we validated WOMAC, a new multidimensional, self-administered health status instrument for patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. The pain, stiffness and physical function subscales fulfil conventional criteria for face, content and construct validity, reliability, responsiveness and relative efficiency. WOMAC is a disease-specific purpose built high performance instrument for evaluative research in osteoarthritis clinical trials.

7,147 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Reliability and Construct validity coefficients confirm the reliability and construct validity of both the AUSCAN LK3.0 and AUS CAN VA3.

232 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index was applied as the principal outcome measure in a double blind randomized parallel trial of Meclomen and Voltaren and demonstrated that the relative efficiency of WOMAC was similar to that of the Lequesne and Doyle indices.
Abstract: Following several years of development and validation, we applied the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index as the principal outcome measure in a double blind randomized parallel trial of Meclomen (100 mg po tid) and Voltaren (25 mg po tid). Statistically significant improvements in clinical status were noted in both treatment groups. At the doses studied, between drug differences favoring Meclomen were observed in pain and stiffness, no difference being noted in physical function. No significant between drug difference was noted in tolerability at these same doses. Our study also demonstrated that the relative efficiency of WOMAC was similar to that of the Lequesne and Doyle indices. Finally, we defined the standard deviation necessary to calculate sample size for future studies using the WOMAC index, both for studies based on static scores and those based on change scores.

163 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In 2 studies, standardized procedures for conducting outcome measurement based on current Food and Drug Administration and European League Against Rheumatism guidelines for osteoarthritis clinical trials are developed, and the standard deviation for these outcome measures is determined.
Abstract: Defining the minimum clinically important difference or delta to be detected in a clinical trial depends on a number of factors including the research hypothesis, patient characteristics, the nature of the intervention and the trial design In 2 studies, we have developed standardized procedures for conducting outcome measurement based on current Food and Drug Administration and European League Against Rheumatism guidelines for osteoarthritis clinical trials, and determined the standard deviation for these outcome measures In the final component of this series of studies, we have used a Delphi technique to establish estimates for delta, and calculated the sample size requirements under 2 different conditions of Type I and Type II error probabilities

142 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In this article, the authors found that perceived pain severity varies substantially with time of day and the onset of the day of the week, and that a significant circadian rhythm was associated with pain in the majority of patients.
Abstract: Twenty patients with primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee completed self-administered questionnaires probing pain severity on 10 occasions every day for 7 consecutive days. Rhythmometric analyses detected a significant circadian rhythm in pain in the majority of patients. Our data suggest that perceived pain severity varies substantially with time of day. These observations have important implications for the administration of pain questionnaires as outcome measures for clinical trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in OA of the knee.

114 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Dec 2003-Pain
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide recommendations for the core outcome domains that should be considered by investigators conducting clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments for chronic pain, and develop a core set of outcome domains would facilitate comparison and pooling of d
Abstract: Objective. To provide recommendations for the core outcome domains that should be considered by investigators conducting clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments for chronic pain. Development of a core set of outcome domains would facilitate comparison and pooling of d

3,476 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The KOOS proved reliable, responsive to surgery and physical therapy, and valid for patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and can be used to evaluate the course of knee injury and treatment outcome.
Abstract: There is broad consensus that good outcome measures are needed to distinguish interventions that are effective from those that are not. This task requires standardized, patient- centered measures that can be administered at a low cost. We developed a questionnaire to assess short- and long-term patient-relevant outcomes following knee injury, based on the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index, a literature review, an expert panel, and a pilot study. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) is self-administered and assesses five outcomes: pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, and knee-related quality of life. In this clinical study, the KOOS proved reliable, responsive to surgery and physical therapy, and valid for patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The KOOS meets basic criteria of outcome measures and can be used to evaluate the course of knee injury and treatment outcome.

3,003 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
05 Aug 1995-BMJ
TL;DR: Two consensus methods commonly adopted in medical, nursing, and health services research--the Delphi process and the nominal group technique (also known as the expert panel)--are described, together with the most appropriate situations for using them.
Abstract: Health providers face the problem of trying to make decisions in situations where there is insufficient information and also where there is an overload of (often contradictory) information. Statistical methods such as meta-analysis have been developed to summarise and to resolve inconsistencies in study findings—where information is available in an appropriate form. Consensus methods provide another means of synthesising information, but are liable to use a wider range of information than is common in statistical methods, and where published information is inadequate or non-existent these methods provide a means of harnessing the insights of appropriate experts to enable decisions to be made. Two consensus methods commonly adopted in medical, nursing, and health services research—the Delphi process and the nominal group technique (also known as the expert panel)—are described, together with the most appropriate situations for using them; an outline of the process involved in undertaking a study using each method is supplemented by illustrations of the authors' work. Key methodological issues in using the methods are discussed, along with the distinct contribution of consensus methods as aids to decision making, both in clinical practice and in health service development. This is the sixth in a series of seven articles describing non-quantitative techniquesand showing their value in health research Quantitative methods such as meta-analysis have been developed to provide statistical overviews of the results of clinical trials and to resolve inconsistencies in the results of published studies. Consensus methods are another means of dealing with conflicting scientific evidence. They allow a wider range of study types to be considered than is usual in statistical reviews. In addition they allow a greater role for the qualitative assessment of evidence (box 1). These methods, unlike those described in the other papers in this series, are primarily concerned with deriving quantitative estimates through qualitative …

2,961 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Twenty-five carefully worded recommendations have been generated based on a critical appraisal of existing guidelines, a systematic review of research evidence and the consensus opinions of an international, multidisciplinary group of experts for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis.

2,616 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A consensus meeting was convened by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to provide recommendations for interpreting clinical importance of treatment outcomes in clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of chronic pain treatments as discussed by the authors.

2,581 citations