We observed a lack of consistency in the application of methods for computing MID or MCID for generic and disease-specific HRQoL measures .
The anchor-based method yields conservative estimates of MID or MCID , compared to the distribution-based method .
OBJECTIVES The objective of the study was to assess the usability of minimal important difference ( MID ) and minimal clinical ly important difference ( MCID ) for measuring meaningful changes in disease-specific and generic health-related quality -of-life ( HRQoL ) outcomes in patient-centered care .
Three methods for minimally important difference: no relationship was found with the net proportion of patients improving.
OBJECTIVE To determine the impact on a responder type analysis of using three published methods to obtain the minimally important difference ( MID ) on the conclusion of a r and omized controlled trial ( RCT ) . STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Using data from an RCT of supportive-expressive group therapy ( SEGT-intervention ) vs. st and ard care ( control ) in women with metastatic breast cancer , we measured individual responsiveness to change according to three levels of predefined MID ( 0.2 SD , 0.5 SD , and 1 st and ard error of measurement ) of the following six vali date d question naires : Profile of Mood States , Impact of Event Scale , Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale , EORTC Quality -of-Life Question naire Core-30 , Mental Adjustment to Cancer , and a pain visual analog scale . The proportion of women improved by SEGT  and the number needed to treat according to three levels of MID were calculated . RESULTS There was no consistent difference in the net proportion of women improving with the SEGT vs. control arm according to the three different levels of MID . CONCLUSION The choice between different levels of distribution-based MID did not make an important difference in the net proportion of women improving with the SEGT . Future research should compare MID derived from clinical anchors , in particular patient opinions
We observed a lack of consistency in the application of methods for computing MID or MCID for generic and disease-specific HRQoL measures .
The anchor-based method yields conservative estimates of MID or MCID , compared to the distribution-based method .
OBJECTIVES The objective of the study was to assess the usability of minimal important difference ( MID ) and minimal clinical ly important difference ( MCID ) for measuring meaningful changes in disease-specific and generic health-related quality -of-life ( HRQoL ) outcomes in patient-centered care .