ReviewThe American journal of sports medicine2023
The Minimal Clinically Important Difference: A Review of Clinical Significance.
Review in The American journal of sports medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07364188 (Bronchodilator Response in COPD and Asthma), which is not on this map. Cited by 61 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Bronchodilator Response in COPD and Asthma: Correlation Between Spirometry, IOS Indices, and Dyspnea Relief
Who cites it
61 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Fascia iliaca compartment block for postoperative hip fracture pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of Tart Cherry Juice Supplementation on Recovery from Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage in Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2026Pooled it
- Emotional and psychosocial function after dorsal column spinal cord stimulator implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) following surgical knee ligament reconstruction: a systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Pooled it
- Traditional Chinese exercises for motor symptoms and mobility in patients with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of exercise on brain-derived neurotrophic factors in middle-aged and older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical relevance of patient-reported outcome measures in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Tai chi improves balance performance in healthy older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) with and without exercise to reduce fear of falling in older people living in the community.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Functional Status Scale in Pediatric Neurocritical Care Patients: Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Neurocritical care · 2026Trial
- Is training speed an accurate predictor of who attains a minimal clinically important difference in the six-minute walk test in people with chronic stroke?Topics in stroke rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Ticagrelor Compared to Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndromes trial (TC4): a Bayesian pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Trial
- Digital Physiotherapeutic Scoliosis-Specific Exercises for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Physiotherapists as first-contact practitioners for patients with low back pain in French primary care: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Cumulative surgeon volume is associated with improved outcomes following hip arthroscopy: A national registry study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life of People Living with Hansen's Disease Undergoing Multidrug Therapy.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Definition of Clinically Meaningful Thresholds for the Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire and Eckardt Score: A Multicenter Psychometric Study.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- Gait speed recovery after iliofemoral ligament-preserving hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: associations with early postoperative gait kinematics.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a term synonymous with orthopaedic clinical research over the past decade. The term represents the smallest change in a patient-reported outcome measure that is of genuine clinical value to patients. It has been derived in a myriad of ways in existing orthopaedic literature. PURPOSE: To describe the various modalities for deriving the MCID. STUDY
designNarrative review; Level of evidence, 4.
methodsThe definitions of common MCID determinations were first identified. These were then evaluated by their clinical and statistical merits and limitations.
resultsThere are 3 primary ways for determining the MCID: anchor-based analysis, distribution-based analysis, and sensitivity- and specificity-based analysis. Each has unique strengths and weaknesses with respect to its ability to evaluate the patient's clinical status change from baseline to posttreatment. Anchor-based analyses are inherently tied to clinical status yet lack standardization. Distribution-based analyses are the opposite, with strong foundations in statistics, yet they fail to adequately address the clinical status change. Sensitivity and specificity analyses offer a compromise of the other methodologies but still rely on a somewhat arbitrarily defined global transition question.
conclusionThis current concepts review demonstrates the need for (1) better standardization in the establishment of MCIDs for orthopaedic patient-reported outcome measures and (2) better study design-namely, until a universally accepted MCID derivation exists, studies attempting to derive the MCID should utilize the anchor-based within-cohort design based on Food and Drug Administration recommendations. Ideally, large studies reporting the MCID as an outcome will also derive the value for their populations. It is important to consider that there may be reasonable replacements for current derivations of the MCID. As such, future research should consider an alternative threshold score with a more universal method of derivation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34854345What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.