-
1
-
-
79952632450
-
The measurement of pain in patients with trigeminal neuralgia
-
Chen HI, Lee JY. The measurement of pain in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. Clin Neurosurg. 2010;57:129-133.
-
(2010)
Clin Neurosurg
, Issue.57
, pp. 129-133
-
-
Chen, H.I.1
Lee, J.Y.2
-
2
-
-
80053576727
-
CyberKnife stereotactic radiosurgical rhizotomy for refractory trigeminal neuralgia
-
Tang CT, Chang SD, Tseng KY, Liu MY, Ju DT. CyberKnife stereotactic radiosurgical rhizotomy for refractory trigeminal neuralgia. J Clin Neurosci. 2011; 18(11):1449-1453.
-
(2011)
J Clin Neurosci
, vol.18
, Issue.11
, pp. 1449-1453
-
-
Tang, C.T.1
Chang, S.D.2
Tseng, K.Y.3
Liu, M.Y.4
Ju, D.T.5
-
3
-
-
79953190029
-
Outcomes of Gamma Knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia after a minimum 3-year follow-up
-
Park SH, Hwang SK. Outcomes of Gamma Knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia after a minimum 3-year follow-up. J Clin Neurosci. 2011;18(5):645-648.
-
(2011)
J Clin Neurosci
, vol.18
, Issue.5
, pp. 645-648
-
-
Park, S.H.1
Hwang, S.K.2
-
4
-
-
0034237191
-
Gamma Knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia: The initial experience of the Barrow Neurological Institute
-
Rogers CL, Shetter AG, Fiedler JA, Smith KA, Han PP, Speiser BL. Gamma Knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia: the initial experience of the Barrow Neurological Institute. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;47(4):1013-1019.
-
(2000)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
, vol.47
, Issue.4
, pp. 1013-1019
-
-
Rogers, C.L.1
Shetter, A.G.2
Fiedler, J.A.3
Smith, K.A.4
Han, P.P.5
Speiser, B.L.6
-
5
-
-
84876733612
-
Microvascular decompression for classic trigeminal neuralgia: Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain improvement for patient reported outcomes
-
Reddy VK, Parker SL, Patrawala SA, Lockney DT, Su P-F, Mericle RA. Microvascular decompression for classic trigeminal neuralgia: determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain improvement for patient reported outcomes. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(5):749-754.
-
(2013)
Neurosurgery
, vol.72
, Issue.5
, pp. 749-754
-
-
Reddy, V.K.1
Parker, S.L.2
Patrawala, S.A.3
Lockney, D.T.4
Su, P.-F.5
Mericle, R.A.6
-
6
-
-
0031788970
-
Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: Part 1
-
Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH. Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther. 1998;78(11):1186-1196.
-
(1998)
Phys Ther
, vol.78
, Issue.11
, pp. 1186-1196
-
-
Stratford, P.W.1
Binkley, J.M.2
Riddle, D.L.3
Guyatt, G.H.4
-
7
-
-
0024852022
-
Measurement of health status: Ascertaining theminimal clinically important difference
-
Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining theminimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10(4):407-415.
-
(1989)
Control Clin Trials
, vol.10
, Issue.4
, pp. 407-415
-
-
Jaeschke, R.1
Singer, J.2
Guyatt, G.H.3
-
8
-
-
79955761307
-
A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis
-
Wright AA, Cook CE, Baxter GD, Dockerty JD, Abbott JH. A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41(5):319-327.
-
(2011)
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
, vol.41
, Issue.5
, pp. 319-327
-
-
Wright, A.A.1
Cook, C.E.2
Baxter, G.D.3
Dockerty, J.D.4
Abbott, J.H.5
-
9
-
-
34748883705
-
Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: A review of concepts and methods
-
Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW Jr, Schuler TC. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007;7(5):541-546.
-
(2007)
Spine J
, vol.7
, Issue.5
, pp. 541-546
-
-
Copay, A.G.1
Subach, B.R.2
Glassman, S.D.3
Polly Jr., D.W.4
Schuler, T.C.5
-
10
-
-
79955638763
-
Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis
-
Parker SL, Adogwa O, Paul AR, et al. Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14(5):598-604.
-
(2011)
J Neurosurg Spine
, vol.14
, Issue.5
, pp. 598-604
-
-
Parker, S.L.1
Adogwa, O.2
Paul, A.R.3
-
11
-
-
77952412409
-
Neck disability index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: The minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion
-
Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA. Neck Disability Index, Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J. 2010;10(6):469-474.
-
(2010)
Spine J
, vol.10
, Issue.6
, pp. 469-474
-
-
Carreon, L.Y.1
Glassman, S.D.2
Campbell, M.J.3
Anderson, P.A.4
-
12
-
-
54449084430
-
Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: A choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36 and pain scales
-
Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J. 2008;8(6):968-974.
-
(2008)
Spine J
, vol.8
, Issue.6
, pp. 968-974
-
-
Copay, A.G.1
Glassman, S.D.2
Subach, B.R.3
Berven, S.4
Schuler, T.C.5
Carreon, L.Y.6
|