Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40896225›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025

Estimating a minimum clinically important difference for the Developmental Behaviour Checklist - parent report.

Daniel L Sutherland, Emma L Taylor, Kylie M Gray, Richard P Hastings, Amanda Allard, Joanna Carr, Joanna Griffin, Nicola McMeekin, Elizabeth Randell, Daisy Russell and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Daniel L SutherlandCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Emma L TaylorCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Kylie M GrayIntellectual Disabilities Research Institute (IDRIS), School of Social Policy and Society, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Richard P HastingsCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Amanda AllardCouncil for Disabled Children, London, United Kingdom.
Joanna CarrCouncil for Disabled Children, London, United Kingdom.
Joanna GriffinCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Nicola McMeekinSchool of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Elizabeth RandellCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Daisy RussellCouncil for Disabled Children, London, United Kingdom.
Bronwen Willoughby-RichardsCouncil for Disabled Children, London, United Kingdom.
Jeanne WolstencroftThe Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Paul A ThompsonIntellectual Disabilities Research Institute (IDRIS), School of Social Policy and Society, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Evaluating the effectiveness of interventions relies on understanding what change in a main outcome is sufficient to be considered meaningful. Our aim was to estimate a Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the Developmental Behaviour Checklist, parent-report (DBC-P)- a measure of behavioural and emotional problems in children and adolescents with intellectual disabilities. Methods: We generated distribution-based estimates through meta-analysis of intervention evaluations using the DBC-P as an outcome measure. We also generated anchor-based estimates using case scenarios with 10 parent carers and 21 professionals working with people with intellectual disabilities. Results: 21 studies were included in the meta-analyses and indicated an average DBC total raw score decrease of 3.01 or 4.73 (depending on analytic methods) in randomised controlled trials, and an average decrease of 9.16 points in pre-post designs. Parent carers provided a median MCID estimate of 6 (IQR 4, 7) and professionals provided a median estimate of 8 (IQR 5, 14). Conclusions: These findings contextualise DBC-P score changes in relation to outcomes from other interventions and parent carer and professional views. Which MCID value to choose depends on what factors are prioritised for an intervention.

Indexed as

autismDevelopmental Behavior Checklist (DBC)intellectual disabilitiesmeta analysisminimum clinically important difference (MCID)

Identifiers

PMID40896225
PMCPMC12395345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.