Literature DB >> 29622290

Minimal Clinically Important Difference: A Review of Outcome Measure Score Interpretation.

Lisa Engel1, Dorcas E Beaton2, Zahi Touma3.   

Abstract

Clinicians, researchers, and outcome stakeholders have the crucial, albeit difficult, task of quantifying when a person or group experiences important change or difference on any given outcome measure, often in response to a specific intervention. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) provides this quantified value of change/difference for a measure. There are many methods for MCID derivation, which can result in multiple values for the same measure. Thus, it is important for potential users of MCID values to be aware of the nuances of MCID development and cautions for interpreting values. This review outlines MCID-related definitions, methods, and guidelines.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Change; Difference; Important; Methodology; Minimal important change; Outcomes assessment; Reproducibility of results

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29622290     DOI: 10.1016/j.rdc.2018.01.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rheum Dis Clin North Am        ISSN: 0889-857X            Impact factor:   2.670


  12 in total

1.  Translation and perceptions of the French version of the Cancer Survivor Profile-Breast Cancer (CSPro-BC): a tool to identify and manage unmet needs.

Authors:  Dominique Tremblay; Karine Bilodeau; Marie-José Durand; Marie-France Coutu
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2019-03-23       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  The Potential of Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy-Based Neurofeedback-A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Best Practice.

Authors:  Simon H Kohl; David M A Mehler; Michael Lührs; Robert T Thibault; Kerstin Konrad; Bettina Sorger
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 5.152

3.  Measurement properties of selected patient-reported outcome measures for use in randomised controlled trials in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vibeke Strand; Lee S Simon; Alexa Simon Meara; Zahi Touma
Journal:  Lupus Sci Med       Date:  2020-06

4.  Psychometric Validation of the Autism Impact Measure (AIM).

Authors:  Richard Houghton; Brigitta Monz; Kiely Law; Georg Loss; Stephanie Le Scouiller; Frank de Vries; Tom Willgoss
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2019-06

5.  Substantial clinical benefit and patient acceptable symptom states of the Forgotten Joint Score 12 after primary knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Siri Heijbel; Annette W-Dahl; Kjell G Nilsson; Margareta Hedström
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 3.717

6.  The minimal important change for the seven-item disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH 7) questionnaire - Assessing shoulder function in patients with subacromial pain.

Authors:  Jenny M Nordqvist; Theresa M Holmgren; Lars E Adolfsson; Birgitta E Öberg; Kajsa M Johansson
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2021-03-23

7.  Meaningful change in 6-minute walk in people with peripheral artery disease.

Authors:  Mary M McDermott; Lu Tian; Michael H Criqui; Luigi Ferrucci; Michael S Conte; Lihui Zhao; Lingyu Li; Robert Sufit; Tamar S Polonsky; Melina R Kibbe; Philip Greenland; Christiaan Leeuwenburgh; Jack M Guralnik
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 4.860

8.  Consensus on the reporting and experimental design of clinical and cognitive-behavioural neurofeedback studies (CRED-nf checklist).

Authors:  Tomas Ros; Stefanie Enriquez-Geppert; Vadim Zotev; Kymberly D Young; Guilherme Wood; Susan Whitfield-Gabrieli; Feng Wan; Patrik Vuilleumier; François Vialatte; Dimitri Van De Ville; Doron Todder; Tanju Surmeli; James S Sulzer; Ute Strehl; Maurice Barry Sterman; Naomi J Steiner; Bettina Sorger; Surjo R Soekadar; Ranganatha Sitaram; Leslie H Sherlin; Michael Schönenberg; Frank Scharnowski; Manuel Schabus; Katya Rubia; Agostinho Rosa; Miriam Reiner; Jaime A Pineda; Christian Paret; Alexei Ossadtchi; Andrew A Nicholson; Wenya Nan; Javier Minguez; Jean-Arthur Micoulaud-Franchi; David M A Mehler; Michael Lührs; Joel Lubar; Fabien Lotte; David E J Linden; Jarrod A Lewis-Peacock; Mikhail A Lebedev; Ruth A Lanius; Andrea Kübler; Cornelia Kranczioch; Yury Koush; Lilian Konicar; Simon H Kohl; Silivia E Kober; Manousos A Klados; Camille Jeunet; T W P Janssen; Rene J Huster; Kerstin Hoedlmoser; Laurence M Hirshberg; Stephan Heunis; Talma Hendler; Michelle Hampson; Adrian G Guggisberg; Robert Guggenberger; John H Gruzelier; Rainer W Göbel; Nicolas Gninenko; Alireza Gharabaghi; Paul Frewen; Thomas Fovet; Thalía Fernández; Carlos Escolano; Ann-Christine Ehlis; Renate Drechsler; R Christopher deCharms; Stefan Debener; Dirk De Ridder; Eddy J Davelaar; Marco Congedo; Marc Cavazza; Marinus H M Breteler; Daniel Brandeis; Jerzy Bodurka; Niels Birbaumer; Olga M Bazanova; Beatrix Barth; Panagiotis D Bamidis; Tibor Auer; Martijn Arns; Robert T Thibault
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 13.501

9.  Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the EQ-5D-5L in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Xin Hu; Mingxia Jing; Mei Zhang; Ping Yang; Xiaolong Yan
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Determining the Minimal Important Difference for the Wound-QoL Questionnaire.

Authors:  Janine Topp; Christine Blome; Matthias Augustin; Nicole Mohr; Eike Sebastian Debus; Holger Diener; Rachel Sommer
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 2.711

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.