All MCIDs Are Wrong, But Some May be Useful

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate how to apply a baseline-adjusted receiver operator characteristic curve (AROC) analysis for minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) in an empirical data set and discuss new insights relating to MCIDs. DESIGN: Retrospective study. METHODS: This study includes data from 999 active-duty military service patients enrolled in the United States Military Health System's Military Orthopedics Tracking Injuries and Outcomes Network. Anchored MCIDs were calculated using the standard receiver operator characteristic analysis and the AROC analysis for the Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference and Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS). Point estimates where confidence intervals (CIs) crossed the 0.5 identity line on the area-under-the-curve (AUC) analysis were considered statistically invalid. MCID estimates where CIs crossed 0 were considered theoretically invalid. RESULTS: In applying an AROC analysis, the region of AUC and MCID validity for the PROMIS Pain Interference score exists when the baseline score is greater than 61.0 but less than 72.3. For DVPRS, the region of MCID validity is when the baseline score is greater than 5.9 but less than 7.9. CONCLUSION: Baseline values influence not only the MCID but also the accuracy of the MCID. MCIDs are statistically and theoretically valid for only a discrete range of baseline scores. Our findings suggest that the MCID may be too flawed a construct to accurately benchmark treatment outcomes.

Automated summary

This article demonstrates the application of a baseline-adjusted receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for MCIDs in an empirical data set, and discusses new insights relating to MCIDs.