ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Responsiveness and minimum important change of the Pharmacotherapeutic Symptom Evaluation-20-Australian version: a tool for measuring changes in medicine-related symptoms over time.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMonitoring patient-reported symptoms over time may support early detection of medicine-related harms. The Pharmacotherapeutic Symptom Evaluation-20-Australian version (PHASE-20-Australian version) is an 11-point rating scale designed for longitudinal monitoring of medicine-related symptoms; however, its responsiveness and minimum important change (MIC) have not been established.
aimTo evaluate the responsiveness and MIC of the PHASE-20-Australian version for monitoring changes in medicine-related symptoms over time.
methodA prospective cohort study was conducted among Australian adults (≥ 18 years) taking medications. Participants completed the PHASE-20-Australian version at baseline and follow-up and reported perceived symptom changes using the Global Rating Scale (GRS) at follow-up. Responsiveness was assessed by correlating score changes with the GRS and calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). MIC was estimated using ROC anchor-based and 0.5 standard deviation (SD) distribution-based methods and then compared with the Smallest Detectable Change (SDC).
resultsAmong 102 participants, 52% were aged ≥ 60 years and 65.7% were female. Strong correlations were observed for overall score changes (rho = 0.815) with the GRS as well as for 84.2% of individual symptoms (rho = 0.701-0.897). The tool demonstrated good to strong discriminative ability (AUC = 0.739-0.975 for improvement; 0.764-0.977 for deterioration), with sensitivity and specificity ≥ 0.75 for 16 symptoms. The MIC values ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 using the ROC method and 0.9-1.8 using the 0.5 SD approach. The estimated MIC values exceeded the SDC for 84.2% of symptoms. Limited responsiveness (rho < 0.7, AUC < 0.7) and MIC values below the SDC were noted for forgetful, swollen legs/ankles and frequent urination/incontinent of urine.
conclusionThe PHASE-20-Australian version is responsive for most symptoms, with a clinically meaningful change of approximately 2.0 points on a 0-10 scale. The estimated MIC is applicable at the individual level, although caution is needed for symptoms with an MIC below the SDC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.