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 .
Sufficiently Important Difference: Expanding the Framework of Clinical Significance
Background . It is generally agreed that r and omized controlled trials should be powered to detect small but clinical ly significant treatment effects . Toward these ends , minimal important difference ( MID ) was proposed as a benchmark for design ing trials and for interpreting health-related quality -of-life instrument scores . MID was defined in 1989 as “ the smallest difference in score in the domain of interest which patients perceive as beneficial and which would m and ate , in the absence of troubling side effects and excessive cost , a change in the patient ’s management . ” Objective . 1 ) To exp and the idea of minimal clinical ly important difference so as to take into account harms as well as benefits . 2 ) To propose concepts and methods with which to do so . Summary . The authors define sufficiently important difference ( SID ) as the smallest amount of patient-valued benefit that an intervention would require to justify associated costs , risks , and other harms . As a means toward estimation of SID , the authors propose benefit-harm tradeoff methods , in which domains of benefit and harm are systematic ally traded off against each other and assessed in relation to the global decision of whether a treatment choice is worthwhile . Specific SID estimates can be used to power and interpret clinical trials or to inform health services research and /or public health policy . This article briefly describes the evolution of the important difference concept and outlines similarities and differences between MID and SID
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 .