Psychometric validation of the physician global assessment scale for assessing severity of psoriasis disease activity
- 556 Downloads
The Physician Global Assessment (PGA) is a key measure of psoriasis frequently used in clinical trials. A psychometric validation of a three-item (erythema, induration, and scaling) PGA scale was performed using Phase 2 data.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) tested the PGA measurement model and appropriateness of equal weighting of the items. PGA test–retest reliability was assessed by estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Internal consistency reliability was gauged by calculating Cronbach’s coefficient α (CCα). Clinically important difference (CID) was defined using the repeated measures model to estimate the relationship between PGA and Patient Global Assessment (PtGA). Known-group, convergent, and divergent validity for the PGA were also assessed.
197 patients with psoriasis were randomized to tofacitinib 2, 5, 15 mg twice daily, or placebo. CFA demonstrated that the PGA measurement model fitted the data using equal weighting of the PGA items. The PGA scale demonstrated good test–retest reliability (ICC > 0.7) and internal consistency reliability (CCα > 0.8). The CID for PGA was estimated at 0.52 (95 % confidence interval: 0.47, 0.56). A robust monotonic relationship between PGA and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) data substantiated known-group validity. Relatively high correlations of PGA with PASI and PtGA data (all correlations >0.5 except at baseline) supported convergent validity; relatively low correlations of PGA with the Pain/Discomfort Assessment and the Ocular Comfort Index supported divergent validity.
The three-item PGA scale has sound psychometric properties with respect to reliability and validity, with equal weighting of the items being appropriate.
KeywordsPhysician Global Assessment Psoriasis Validation
- 3.European Medicines Agency. (2004). Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products indicated for the treatment of psoriasis.Google Scholar
- 6.Berth-Jones, J., Grotzinger, K., Rainville, C., et al. (2006). A study examining inter- and intrarater reliability of three scales for measuring severity of psoriasis: Psoriasis area and severity index, physician’s global assessment and lattice system physician’s global assessment. British Journal of Dermatology, 155, 707–713.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Robinson, A., Kardos, M., & Kimball, A. B. (2012). Physician global assessment and psoriasis area and severity index: Why do both? A systematic analysis of randomized controlled trials of biologics agents for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 66, 369–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 20.Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS ® system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, Nc: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- 21.Kline, R. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 22.Fayers, F. M., & Machin, D. (2007). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis, and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes (2nd ed.). Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 23.Cappelleri, J. C., & Bushmakin, A. G. (2013). Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Statistical Methods in Medical Research (in press).Google Scholar
- 27.Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- 28.Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar