Minimum clinically important difference: The crock of gold at the end of the rainbow?

John R Kirwan*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The minimum clinically important difference (MCID), like the crock of gold at the end of the rainbow, is attractive but unattainable. Empirical data on how rheumatologists make clinical decisions show a wide variety of approaches and lack of agreement in decision making. Clinical importance needs to consider the magnitude of both the benefits and adverse events. A proposal for future attempts to define MCID could explore links between short term changes in outcomes to improvement in disability outcome many years later. Defining response to treatment could be explored using different approaches and involving patients and other professional groups.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)439-444
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Rheumatology
Volume28
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2001

Keywords

  • Minimal clinically important difference
  • Outcome and process assessment
  • Randomized clinical trials

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Minimum clinically important difference: The crock of gold at the end of the rainbow?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this