ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Estimating a minimum clinically important difference for the Developmental Behaviour Checklist - parent report.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.