• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

[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.

PMID:19952393
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

相似文献

1
[Methods to determine minimal clinically important difference].
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2009 Nov;34(11):1058-62.
2
Minimal (clinically) important differences for the Fatigue Assessment Scale in sarcoidosis.肌病性多发性神经病的疲劳评估量表的最小(临床)重要差异。
Respir Med. 2011 Sep;105(9):1388-95. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.004. Epub 2011 Jun 23.
3
Testing minimal clinically important difference: consensus or conundrum?测试最小临床重要差异:共识还是难题?
Spine J. 2010 Apr;10(4):321-7. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2009.10.015.
4
How can we assess outcomes of clinical trials: the MCID approach.我们如何评估临床试验的结果:最小临床重要差异(MCID)方法。
COPD. 2007 Sep;4(3):191-4. doi: 10.1080/15412550701471231.
5
Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales.腰椎手术患者的最小临床重要差异:使用奥斯威斯利功能障碍指数、医学结局研究简明健康调查问卷36项版本和疼痛量表的方法选择
Spine J. 2008 Nov-Dec;8(6):968-74. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.11.006. Epub 2008 Jan 16.
6
Determining the minimal clinically important differences in activity, fatigue, and sleep quality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.确定类风湿关节炎患者活动度、疲劳和睡眠质量的最小临床重要差异。
J Rheumatol. 2007 Feb;34(2):280-9.
7
Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: methodological issues.最小临床重要差异、低疾病活动状态和患者可接受症状状态:方法学问题。
J Rheumatol. 2005 Oct;32(10):2025-9.
8
Clinical significance of health status assessment measures in head and neck cancer: what do quality-of-life scores mean?头颈部癌症健康状况评估指标的临床意义:生活质量评分意味着什么?
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004 Jul;130(7):825-9. doi: 10.1001/archotol.130.7.825.
9
Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.确定患者报告结局的反应性和最小重要差异的推荐方法。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Feb;61(2):102-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012. Epub 2007 Aug 3.
10
Minimal clinically important difference for 7 measures of fatigue in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.系统性红斑狼疮患者7种疲劳测量指标的最小临床重要差异
J Rheumatol. 2008 Apr;35(4):635-42. Epub 2008 Mar 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Effects of Dexmedetomidine or Propofol on Postoperative Oxygenation Index During Invasive Ventilation in Patients After off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: a Single-Center Retrospective Study.右美托咪定或丙泊酚对非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术后有创通气期间患者术后氧合指数的影响:一项单中心回顾性研究
Int J Gen Med. 2025 Jun 27;18:3463-3476. doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S524691. eCollection 2025.
2
Inconsistencies in clinically significant outcome metrics for knee cartilage repair: a systematic review.膝关节软骨修复临床显著结局指标的不一致性:一项系统评价
Musculoskelet Surg. 2025 Feb 15. doi: 10.1007/s12306-025-00890-0.
3
A Utilitarian Perspective on Risk Quantification for Clinical Significance in Binary Outcomes.
二元结局中临床意义风险量化的功利主义视角
Inquiry. 2024 Jan-Dec;61:469580241248134. doi: 10.1177/00469580241248134.
4
MCID and PASS in Knee Surgeries. Theoretical Aspects and Clinical Relevance References.膝关节手术中的 MCID 和 PASS。理论方面和临床相关性 参考文献。
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Jun;31(6):2060-2067. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07359-2. Epub 2023 Mar 10.
5
Establishing Minimal Clinically Important Differences for the Quality of Life Instrument in Patients With Breast Cancer QLICP-BR (V2.0) Based on Anchor-Based and Distribution-Based Methods.基于锚定法和分布法确定乳腺癌患者生活质量量表QLICP-BR(V2.0)的最小临床重要差异
Front Oncol. 2022 May 2;12:753729. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.753729. eCollection 2022.
6
Deconstructing the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID).解构最小临床重要差异(MCID)。
Orthop Res Rev. 2022 Feb 17;14:35-42. doi: 10.2147/ORR.S349268. eCollection 2022.