Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2006 Aug 22:4:54.
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-54.

Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change

Affiliations
Review

Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change

Henrica C de Vet et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

Abstract

Changes in scores on health status questionnaires are difficult to interpret. Several methods to determine minimally important changes (MICs) have been proposed which can broadly be divided in distribution-based and anchor-based methods. Comparisons of these methods have led to insight into essential differences between these approaches. Some authors have tried to come to a uniform measure for the MIC, such as 0.5 standard deviation and the value of one standard error of measurement (SEM). Others have emphasized the diversity of MIC values, depending on the type of anchor, the definition of minimal importance on the anchor, and characteristics of the disease under study. A closer look makes clear that some distribution-based methods have been merely focused on minimally detectable changes. For assessing minimally important changes, anchor-based methods are preferred, as they include a definition of what is minimally important. Acknowledging the distinction between minimally detectable and minimally important changes is useful, not only to avoid confusion among MIC methods, but also to gain information on two important benchmarks on the scale of a health status measurement instrument. Appreciating the distinction, it becomes possible to judge whether the minimally detectable change of a measurement instrument is sufficiently small to detect minimally important changes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Jacobson N, Follette W, Revenstorf D. Toward a standard definition of clinically significant change. Behavior Therapy. 1986;17:308–311. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(86)80061-2. - DOI
    1. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:407–415. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:12–19. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.59.1.12. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lydick E, Epstein RS. Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res. 1993;2:221–226. doi: 10.1007/BF00435226. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:395–407. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00044-1. - DOI - PubMed