Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39466380›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024

Methodological considerations in calculating the minimal clinically important change score for the core outcome measures index (COMI): insights from a large single-centre spine surgery registry.

Andrea Cina, Jacopo Vitale, Daniel Haschtmann, Markus Loibl, Tamas F Fekete, Frank Kleinstück, Fabio Galbusera, Catherine R Jutzeler, Anne F Mannion

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. How reliable are the Core Outcome Measures Index and Global Treatment Outcome as measures of treatment success after surgery for central lumbar spinal canal stenosis?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  3. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) comes of age: 18 years of efficient and effective patient-reported outcome measurement in the field of spinal disorders. Part 1. Development of the COMI, interpretation of scores, and use in research.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Andrea CinaDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology (D-HEST), ETH Zurich, Universitätstrasse 2, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland. andrea.cina@hest.ethz.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-6016-6200
Jacopo VitaleDepartment of Teaching, Research and Development, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Daniel HaschtmannDepartment of Spine Surgery and Neurosurgery, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus LoiblDepartment of Spine Surgery and Neurosurgery, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Tamas F FeketeDepartment of Spine Surgery and Neurosurgery, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Frank KleinstückDepartment of Spine Surgery and Neurosurgery, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Fabio GalbuseraDepartment of Teaching, Research and Development, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Catherine R JutzelerDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology (D-HEST), ETH Zurich, Universitätstrasse 2, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland.
Anne F MannionDepartment of Teaching, Research and Development, Schulthess Klinic, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Minimal Clinically Important Change (MCIC) is used in conjunction with Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to determine the clinical relevance of changes in health status. MCIC measures a change within the same person or group over time. This study aims to evaluate the variability in computing MCIC for the Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI) using different methods.

methodsData from a spine centre in Switzerland were used to evaluate variations in MCIC for the COMI score. Distribution-based and anchor-based methods (predictive and nonpredictive) were applied. Bayesian bootstrap estimated confidence intervals.

resultsFrom 27,003 cases, 9821 met the inclusion criteria. Distribution-based methods yielded MCIC values from 0.4 to 1.4. Anchor-based methods showed more variability, with MCIC values from 1.5 to 4.9. Predictive anchor-based methods also provided variable MCIC values for improvement (0.3-2.4), with high sensitivity and specificity. DISCUSSION: MCIC calculation methods produce varying values, emphasizing careful method selection. Distribution-based methods likely measure minimal detectable change, while non-predictive anchor-based methods can yield high MCIC values due to group averaging. Predictive anchor-based methods offer more stable and clinically relevant MCIC values for improvement but are affected by prevalence and reliability corrections.

Indexed as

Minimal Clinically Important DifferenceRegistriesBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSpineCOMIMinimal clinical important changeSpineSurgery outcomes

Identifiers

PMID39466380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.