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
. 2024 Jan 13;14(1):80.
doi: 10.3390/brainsci14010080.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Scales Reported in Stroke Trials: A Review

Biswamohan Mishra  1 , Pachipala Sudheer  1 , Ayush Agarwal  1 , Nilima Nilima  2 , Madakasira Vasantha Padma Srivastava  1 , Venugopalan Y Vishnu  1
Affiliations
Review

Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Scales Reported in Stroke Trials: A Review

Biswamohan Mishra et al. Brain Sci. .

Abstract

There is a growing awareness of the significance of using minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) in stroke research. An MCID is the smallest change in an outcome measure that is considered clinically meaningful. This review is the first to provide a comprehensive summary of various scales and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in stroke research and their MCID values reported in the literature, including a concise overview of the concept of and methods for determining MCIDs in stroke research. Despite the controversies and limitations surrounding the estimation of MCIDs, their importance in modern clinical trials cannot be overstated. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods are recommended for estimating MCIDs, with patient self-evaluation being a crucial component in capturing the patient's perspective on their health. A combination of methods can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the clinical relevance of treatment effects, and incorporating the patient's perspective can enhance the care of stroke patients.

Keywords: MCID; clinical relevance; minimal clinically important change; minimal clinically important difference; patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs); stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure shows the relationship between hypothetical MCID (Minimal Clinically Important Difference) values and sample size. The y-axis shows the MCID in points and the x-axis shows the required sample size in patients.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure illustrates the various methods and approaches used in the estimation of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and other clinical assessments.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Stang A., Poole C., Kuss O. The ongoing tyranny of statistical significance testing in biomedical research. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2010;25:225–230. doi: 10.1007/s10654-010-9440-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vishnu V.Y., Vinny P.W. Statistical Significance and Clinical Importance. Neurol. India. 2021;69:1509. - PubMed
    1. Copay A.G., Subach B.R., Glassman S.D., Polly D.W., Schuler T.C. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: A review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007;7:541–546. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.01.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jaeschke R., Singer J., Guyatt G.H. 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. Kemmler G., Zabernigg A., Gattringer K., Rumpold G., Giesinger J., Sperner-Unterweger B., Holzner B. A new approach to combining clinical relevance and statistical significance for evaluation of quality of life changes in the individual patient. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2010;63:171–179. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.03.016. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources