Skip to main content

Table 2 General results regarding the minimally important difference (MID) determination (N = 46)

From: Distribution- and anchor-based methods to determine the minimally important difference on patient-reported outcome questionnaires in oncology: a structured review

  Number Percent
Approach used for MID determination
 Distribution-based only 3 6.5
 Anchor-based only 6 13.1
 Both distribution- and anchor-based 37 80.4
Term used to design the MID
 MID, referring to: 29 63
  Minimally important difference 16 34.8
  Minimal important difference 13 28.2
 MCID, referring to: 19 41.3
  Minimal clinically important difference 16 34.8
  Minimum clinically important difference 2 4.3
  Minimal clinical important difference 1 2.2
 MIC, referring to: 1 2.2
  Minimal important change 1 2.2
Number of assessment timepoints
 1 2 4.4
 2 31 67.4
 3 6 13
  ≥ 4 7 15.2
Time interval between the assessment times
 2 days 1 2.2
 1 month 7 15.2
 3–6 months 6 13
 1 year 2 4.4
 Based on clinical relevance 3 6.5
 Multiple with a maximum interval of 6 months 14 30.4
 Multiple with a maximum interval > 1 year 5 10.9
 Multiple intervals based on clinical relevance 2 4.4
Floor and ceiling effects studied
 Yes 7 15.2
  Floor and ceiling effects detected (<  15%) 2 28.6
  Floor and ceiling effects no detected (<  15%) 4 57.1
  Not reported 1 14.3
 No 39 84.8
Recommendations for futures studies
 Yes 16 34.8
 No 23 50
 Unclear 7 15.2
Limitations highlighted by authors
 Yes 42 91.3
 No 4 8.7
Possible risk of bias
 Missing data on the HRQOL/PRO measures 16 40
 Bias in the selection of the population 17 42.5
 Bias in the statistical analysis 5 10.9