2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-014-0787-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating the minimum important change in the 15D scores

Abstract: The generic MICs for the change of 15D scores are ±.015. Follow-up studies using the 15D should report the mean change in the 15D score, its statistical significance, relationship to the MIC, and the distribution of the changes of the 15D scores into the five categories.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
212
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

4
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 200 publications
(220 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
6
212
2
Order By: Relevance
“…A higher score reflects a better HRQoL. The minimum important change for the 15D score is estimated to be ±0.015, and 0.015 can also be regarded as the minimum clinically important cross-sectional difference between groups [10]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A higher score reflects a better HRQoL. The minimum important change for the 15D score is estimated to be ±0.015, and 0.015 can also be regarded as the minimum clinically important cross-sectional difference between groups [10]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A difference !0.015 in the 15D score is estimated to be clinically important. 20 The authors hypothesized that the patients enjoy a HRQoL comparable to that of an age-standardized general population.…”
Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the 15D, deterioration of 0.02 to 0.14 units was found in baseline values ranging from 0.79 to 0.85. One previous study has established 0.02 units as the minimum important change (MIC) for the 15D [50]. In sum, more studies to investigate either the MDC or MCID for HRQoL among PwMS are needed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%