Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40677340›Full record

ArticleKidney international reports2025

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the "Patient Activation Measure".

Thomas J Wilkinson, Devika Nair, Alice C Smith, Gurneet K Sohansoha, Ella C Ford, Noemi Vadaszy, Matthew Graham-Brown, Courtney J Lightfoot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international reports, 2025. 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. The minimal clinically important difference for the patient activation measure in a culturally and linguistically diverse cohort with chronic conditions.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

8 authors.

Thomas J WilkinsonNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Center, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Devika NairDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Alice C SmithNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Center, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Gurneet K SohansohaLeicester Kidney Lifestyle Team, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Ella C FordLeicester Kidney Lifestyle Team, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Noemi VadaszyLeicester Kidney Lifestyle Team, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Matthew Graham-BrownNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Center, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Courtney J LightfootNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Center, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.

Funding

CSRD VA IK2 CX002595
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Patient activation is the knowledge, skills, and confidence required to manage one's own health. In chronic kidney disease (CKD), the most frequently used measure of patient activation is the 13-item "Patient Activation Measure" (PAM-13). To help better determine an intervention's clinical effectiveness, trials can interpret changes in patient-derived outcomes using the "minimal clinically important difference" (MCID), defined as the smallest change important to the patient. In this study, we establish the MCID and minimal detectable change (MDC) for PAM-13 in patients with nondialysis CKD using established methodology. Methods: This was a retrospective secondary analysis of a randomized control trial investigating the effects of a digital health intervention in a nondialysis CKD population. The MCID was estimated using anchor-based (using changes in health status from the Short Form-12 [SF-12] survey as the anchor) and distribution-based approaches (SD and effect size methods). The MDC was calculated to measure absolute reliability. Results: To calculate the MCID, we included Conclusion: These values should allow researchers and health care professionals to better interpret improvements from a patient's perspective and could be beneficial in determining whether changes in PAM-13 scores are clinically meaningful to a CKD population.

Indexed as

kidney diseaseminimal clinically important differencepatient activation measurequality of lifeself-management

Identifiers

PMID40677340
PMCPMC12266269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.