Practical issues encountered while determining Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Using a real dataset, we highlighted several major methodological issues raised by the estimation of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of a Patient-Reported Outcomes instrument. We especially considered the management of missing data and the use of more than two times of measurement. While inappropriate missing data management and inappropriate use of multiple time points can lead to loss of precision and/or bias in MCID estimation, these issues are almost never dealt with and require cautious considerations in the context of MCID estimation.

Methods

We used the LIGALONGO study (French Randomized Controlled Trial). We estimated MCID on the SF-36 General Health score by comparing many methods (distribution or anchor-based). Different techniques for

SUBMITTER: Woaye-Hune P 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7251729 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature