ArticleHong Kong journal of occupational therapy : HKJOT2026
Investigation of Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Extended Barthel Index in Inpatients With Acute to Subacute Stroke in China.
Article in Hong Kong journal of occupational therapy : HKJOT, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Extended Barthel Index (EBI) in patients with stroke. Methods: In total, 209 patients with stroke were enrolled from a rehabilitation hospital. The EBI was administered at baseline, day 1, and week 4 after enrolment. At week 4, occupational therapists, patients, and expense payers independently rated the perceived ability change in activities of daily living. The MCID was estimated using distribution-, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve-, anchor-, and regression-based methods. Results: Distribution-based estimates produced small to moderate effect sizes. ROC curve analysis yielded optimal cutoffs around 2.5-3.5 points depending on the roles; sensitivity was high, whereas specificity was low. Anchor-based and regression methods produced separate thresholds for deterioration and improvement across stakeholders. Based on the anchor-based method, the recommended MCID for deterioration ranged from -2.0 to 0 points and for improvement from 4.0 to 6.0 points, varying by rater perspective. Conclusion: Anchor-based MCID values are recommended for clinical use to distinguish improvement from deterioration, directly reflecting the perspectives from patients, therapists, and payers. The established thresholds can guide therapists' goal setting, progress monitoring, and rehabilitation policy decisions.
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.