Background: Although less likely to be reported in clinical trials than expressions of the statistical significance of differences in outcomes, whether or not a treatment has delivered a specified minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is also relevant to patients and their caregivers and doctors. Many dementia treatment randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not reported MCIDs and, where they have been done, observed differences have not reached these.

Methods: As part of the development of the Statistical Analysis Plan for the DOMINO trial, investigators met to consider expert opinion- and distribution-based values for the MCID and triangulated these to provide appropriate values for three outcome measures, the Standardised Mini-mental State Examination (sMMSE), Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Only standard deviations (SD) were presented to investigators who remained blind to treatment allocation.

Results: Adoption of values for MCIDs based upon 0.4 of the SD of the change in score from baseline on the sMMSE, BADLS and NPI in the first 127 participants to complete DOMINO yielded MCIDs of 1.4 points for sMMSE, 3.5 for BADLS and 8.0 for NPI.

Conclusions: Reference to MCIDs is important for the full interpretation of the results of dementia trials and those conducting such trials should be open about the way in which they have determined and chosen their values for the MCIDs.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.2607DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

minimum clinically
8
differences outcomes
8
domino trial
8
values mcids
8
smmse badls
8
mcids
5
determining minimum
4
clinically differences
4
outcomes domino
4
trial background
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!