Frederick Wolfe1, Kaleb Michaud, Vibeke Strand. 1. Arthritis Research Center Foundation and the University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, Kansas 67214, USA. fwolfe@arthritis-research.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Minimally clinically important differences (MCID) have become an important way to interpret data of randomized clinical trials (RCT), but do not reflect the degree of improvement consistent with a "really important difference" (RID). To define RID, we compared mean and/or least desirable clinical states with best and/or most desirable states. METHODS: In total, 8931 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) < 65 years of age completed the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 Physical Component Score (PCS). Definitions of RID were based on values for HAQ and PCS corresponding with the best and worst category of the following conditions: disabled vs not disabled: joint replacement vs no joint replacement; < poverty level vs > poverty level; very satisfied with health vs not; and independent in participation activities vs not. RESULTS: In contrast to published MCID values for the HAQ of approximately 0.22, RID was as high as 0.76 using objective reference conditions and 0.87 using the subjective measure of dependence vs independence. The HAQ score of independent RA patients was 0.38 (SD 0.45), and was 0.42 (SD 0.53) for those very satisfied with their health. The difference in HAQ scores between disabled and working patients was approximately 0.75. PCS differences were similarly increased. CONCLUSION: RID values are 3 to 4 times greater than MCID values. Although MCID are meaningful statistics for RCT, the RID percentage achieved [(actual improvement/RID) 100%] is a simple way to put the results of RCT in a broader perspective that gives an idea of how much additional treatment effect is needed.
OBJECTIVE: Minimally clinically important differences (MCID) have become an important way to interpret data of randomized clinical trials (RCT), but do not reflect the degree of improvement consistent with a "really important difference" (RID). To define RID, we compared mean and/or least desirable clinical states with best and/or most desirable states. METHODS: In total, 8931 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) < 65 years of age completed the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 Physical Component Score (PCS). Definitions of RID were based on values for HAQ and PCS corresponding with the best and worst category of the following conditions: disabled vs not disabled: joint replacement vs no joint replacement; < poverty level vs > poverty level; very satisfied with health vs not; and independent in participation activities vs not. RESULTS: In contrast to published MCID values for the HAQ of approximately 0.22, RID was as high as 0.76 using objective reference conditions and 0.87 using the subjective measure of dependence vs independence. The HAQ score of independent RApatients was 0.38 (SD 0.45), and was 0.42 (SD 0.53) for those very satisfied with their health. The difference in HAQ scores between disabled and working patients was approximately 0.75. PCS differences were similarly increased. CONCLUSION: RID values are 3 to 4 times greater than MCID values. Although MCID are meaningful statistics for RCT, the RID percentage achieved [(actual improvement/RID) 100%] is a simple way to put the results of RCT in a broader perspective that gives an idea of how much additional treatment effect is needed.
Authors: J T Langfitt; B G Vickrey; M P McDermott; S Messing; A T Berg; S S Spencer; M R Sperling; C W Bazil; S Shinnar Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Emilia Gvozdenović; Linda Dirven; Marianne van den Broek; K Huub Han; Esmeralda T H Molenaar; Robert B M Landewé; Willem F Lems; Cornelia F Allaart Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2014-01-03 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; Shuo Yang; Vibeke Strand; Lee Simon; Anna Forsythe; Steve Hamburger; Lang Chen Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: N Lynn Henry; Faouzi Azzouz; Zereunesay Desta; Lang Li; Anne T Nguyen; Suzanne Lemler; Jill Hayden; Karineh Tarpinian; Elizabeth Yakim; David A Flockhart; Vered Stearns; Daniel F Hayes; Anna Maria Storniolo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-02-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael Lukasiewicz; Stephanie Gerard; Adeline Besnard; Bruno Falissard; Elena Perrin; Helene Sapin; Mauricio Tohen; Catherine Reed; Jean-Michel Azorin Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Michael H Schiff; Elaine B Yu; Michael E Weinblatt; Larry W Moreland; Mark C Genovese; Barbara White; Amitabh Singh; Yun Chon; J Michael Woolley Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2006 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Henrica C W de Vet; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Caroline B Terwee; Nicole van der Roer; Dirk L Knol; Heleen Beckerman; Maarten Boers; Lex M Bouter Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-10-11 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: N Lynn Henry; Jon T Giles; Dennis Ang; Monika Mohan; Dina Dadabhoy; Jason Robarge; Jill Hayden; Suzanne Lemler; Karineh Shahverdi; Penny Powers; Lang Li; David Flockhart; Vered Stearns; Daniel F Hayes; Anna Maria Storniolo; Daniel J Clauw Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2007-10-06 Impact factor: 4.872