ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2022
Minimal clinically important difference for the Mandarin version of the Tinnitus Questionnaire determined via anchor-based and distribution-based methods.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous Improvement of Chronic Tinnitus Through a 9-Month Smartphone-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Determining the minimal clinically important difference for EQ-5D-5L scores in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Investigation of Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Extended Barthel Index in Inpatients With Acute to Subacute Stroke in China.Hong Kong journal of occupational therapy : HKJOT · 2026Article
- Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Tinnitus Outcome Measurement Instruments-A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe previous study showed that the Mandarin Tinnitus Questionnaire (MTQ) has satisfactory reliability and validity. We have also completed the classification of the severity of tinnitus based on MTQ scores. In clinical studies, efficacy is often judged by whether results are statistically significant; however, statistical significance does not necessarily equate to clinical significance, whereas the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the scale does. In the following project, we will explore the MCID of the MTQ.
methodsWe recruited participants aged 18 years and above who sought treatment for primary or secondary tinnitus at the Otorhinolaryngology Department of the Hearing Center of West China Hospital, Sichuan University from September 2020 to September 2021. The participants had to undergo the following four assessments of tinnitus severity: doctor evaluation, self-report, the MTQ, and the visual analog scale (VAS), all at baseline and at the follow-up. The MCIDs of the MTQ were established via anchor-based and distribution-based methods. The anchor method used the VAS and self-reported clinical impression as anchors and defined the treatment effectiveness by mean/median and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, while methods of effect size (ES), standard error of measurement (SEM), and reliability change index (RCI) were used in distribution-based methods.
resultsA total of 115 patients were investigated in this study, 57.4% of whom were women. The average age was 43.2 ± 13.20 years. The average MTQ and VAS scores at baseline were 31.3 ± 14.90 and 5.03 ± 2.24, respectively, while the average MTQ and VAS scores at follow-up were 15.9 ± 11.70 and 3.58 ± 2.48, respectively. Moreover, in terms of self-reported clinical impressions, 19 patients indicated that they were cured (16.5%), 24 that it was much better (20.9%), 63 that there was no change (54.8%), and 9 that it was much worse (7.8%). The MCIDs for the change in total MTQ ranged from 6.29 to 19.00, those for improvement from 1.09 to 22.75, and those for deterioration from 3.50 to 7.64.
conclusionWe selected an absolute value of 7.5 as the MCID for the MTQ score. An increase in MTQ score more than 7.5 was considered aggravation of tinnitus, and a decrease in MTQ score more than 7.5 was considered a reduction in tinnitus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.