• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes

by Amy E. Hamaker • September 6, 2019

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

You Might Also Like

  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Signicant Difference
  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Significant Difference
  • Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Shown Psychometrically Sound in Measuring Disability in Patients with Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis
  • Are Patient-Reported Voice Outcomes Better after Surgery or after Radiation for Treatment of T1 Glottic Carcinoma?
Explore This Issue
September 2019

Comment: In recent years, there has been an increased focus on placing patients at the center of health care research. Patient-reported outcomes are directly reported by the patient and pertain to the patient’s health, quality of life, or functional status. However, when considering patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), statistical significance does not necessarily equate to clinical significance. The concept of a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest difference in score, using a given measurement tool, in which patients identify a perceived benefit.

While conceptually straightforward, the author of this state-of-the-art review addresses the practical complexity of calculating the MCID. This article contains a useful overview of the two main methods for calculating MCID, broadly categorized as distribution-based and anchor-based methods. Furthermore, the author provides three key implications for practice. This article is a wonderful resource for researchers who are planning clinical studies with the intent to use the MCID as a benchmark for the magnitude of improvement. It also provides a thorough overview for practicing physicians, to assist them in their interpretation of the MCID within the broader literature and their own patient population.—Sarah Bowe, MD

How do you calculate and interpret the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)?

BOTTOM LINE
Interpretation or application of MCID requires consideration of all caveats underlying the MCID, including the patients in whom it was derived, the limitations of the methodologies used to calculate it, and its accuracy for identifying patients who have experienced clinically significant improvement.

Background: The MCID of a PROM represents a threshold value of change in PROM score deemed to have an implication in clinical management. The MCID is frequently used to interpret the significance of results from clinical studies that use PROMs. However, an understanding of the many caveats of the MCID, as well as its strengths and limitations, is necessary.

Study design: Literature search including primary studies, review articles, and consensus statements.

Setting: MEDLINE and PubMed Central.

Synopsis: The MCID of a PROM may vary depending on the patients and clinical context in which the PROM is given. The primary approaches for calculating MCID are distribution-based and anchor-based methods. Each methodology has strengths and limitations, and the ideal determination of a PROM MCID includes synthesis of results from both approaches. The MCID of a PROM is also not perfect in detecting patients experiencing a clinically important improvement, and this is reflected in its accuracy (e.g., sensitivity and specificity).

Citation: Sedaghat AR. Understanding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of patient-reported outcome measures. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg (published online ahead of print June 4, 2019). doi: 10.1177/0194599819852604

Pages: 1 2 | Multi-Page

Filed Under: Literature Reviews, Otology/Neurotology Tagged With: clinical outcomes, patient careIssue: September 2019

You Might Also Like:

  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Signicant Difference
  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Significant Difference
  • Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Shown Psychometrically Sound in Measuring Disability in Patients with Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis
  • Are Patient-Reported Voice Outcomes Better after Surgery or after Radiation for Treatment of T1 Glottic Carcinoma?

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you invented or patented something that betters the field of otolaryngology?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • Physician Handwriting: A Potentially Powerful Healing Tool

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck

    • Otolaryngologists as Entrepreneurs: Transforming Patient Care And Practice

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Physician Handwriting: A Potentially Powerful Healing Tool
    • Leaky Pipes—Time to Focus on Our Foundations
    • You Are Among Friends: The Value Of Being In A Group
    • How To: Full Endoscopic Procedures of Total Parotidectomy
    • How To: Does Intralesional Steroid Injection Effectively Mitigate Vocal Fold Scarring in a Rabbit Model?

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939