Suppr超能文献

[Methods to determine minimal clinically important difference].

作者信息

Hu Guoqing, Huang Qiongfeng, Huang Zhennan, Sun Zhenqiu

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Central South University, Changsha 410078, China.

出版信息

Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2009 Nov;34(11):1058-62.

Abstract

There are 4 methods to determine a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) currently, namely anchor-based method, distribution-based method, opinion-based method, and literature review. The anchor-based method offers the clinical significance of MCID, but it does not consider the measurement error. The anchor-based method is limited due to difficulty to obtained a suitable anchor in most cases, and variation of MCID with the anchor. The distribution-based method takes measurement error into account, and is easily implemented. The distribution-based method can not provide the clinical explanation of MCID, and the MCID from different samples might differ from each other. There is no golden criterion to judge MCID by distribution-based method so far. The opinion-based method and literature review are based on the opinions of experts and the published literature, respectively. They are usually regarded as a supplement to anchor-based method and distribution-based method. It is suggested that anchor-based method, distribution-based method, and opinion-based method should be used together when determining a MCID.

摘要

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验