Minimum clinically important differences in chronic pain vary considerably by baseline pain and methodological factors: systematic review of empirical studies

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 101, Issue , 2018, Pages 87-106.e2

  Frahm Olsen, Mette ^a,b   Bjerre, Eik ^a   Hansen, Maria Damkjær ^c   Tendal, Britta ^d   Hilden, Jørgen ^b   Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn ^e,f  

^a Rigshospitalet   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c HVIDOVRE HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^d Danish Health and Medicines Authority   (Denmark)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^f Odense Patient Data Explorative Network (OPEN)   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Chronic pain; Methodology; Minimum clinically important difference; Pain; Pain assessment; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIA; CHRONIC PAIN; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MINIMUM CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PAIN THRESHOLD; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROCEDURES; QUALITY OF LIFE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHRONIC PAIN; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; PAIN MANAGEMENT; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85048525770     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.007     Document Type: Review

References (96)

1. Gross, A., Miller, J., D'Sylva, J., Burnie, S.J., Goldsmith, C.H., Graham, N., et al. Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review. Man Ther 15 (2010), 315–333.
2. Wandel, S., Jüni, P., Tendal, B., Nüesch, E., Villiger, P.M., Welton, N.J., et al. Effects of glucosamine, chondroitin, or placebo in patients with osteoarthritis of hip or knee: network meta-analysis. BMJ, 341, 2010, c4675.
3. da Costa, B.R., Nüesch, E., Kasteler, R., Husni, E., Welch, V., Rutjes, A.W.S., et al. Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 9, 2014, CD003115.
4. Machado, G.C., Maher, C.G., Ferreira, P.H., Pinheiro, M.B., Lin, C.-W.C., Day, R.O., et al. Efficacy and safety of paracetamol for spinal pain and osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials. BMJ, 350, 2015, h1225.
5. Pillastrini, P., Rocchi, G., Deserri, D., Foschi, P., Mardegan, M., Naldi, M.T., et al. Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on painful hemiplegic shoulder: a randomised clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil 38 (2016), 1603–1609.
6. Crosby, R.D., Kolotkin, R.L., Williams, G.R., Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56 (2003), 395–407.
7. Dworkin, R.H., Turk, D.C., Wyrwich, K.W., Beaton, D., Cleeland, C.S., Farrar, J.T., et al. Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. J Pain 9 (2008), 105–121.
8. Glassman, S.D., Copay, A.G., Berven, S.H., Polly, D.W., Subach, B.R., Carreon, L.Y., Defining substantial clinical benefit following lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90 (2008), 1839–1847.
9. Johnston, B.C., Thorlund, K., da Costa, B.R., Furukawa, T.A., Guyatt, G.H., New methods can extend the use of minimal important difference units in meta-analyses of continuous outcome measures. J Clin Epidemiol 65 (2012), 817–826.
10. Chansirinukor, W., Maher, C.G., Latimer, J., Hush, J., Comparison of the functional rating index and the 18-item Roland-Morris disability questionnaire: responsiveness and reliability. Spine 30 (2005), 141–145.
11. Ostelo, R.W., Deyo, R.A., Stratford, P., Waddell, G., Croft, P., Von Korff, M., et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33 (2008), 90–94.
12. Black, N., Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ, 346, 2013, f167.
13. Stauffer, M.E., Taylor, S.D., Watson, D.J., Peloso, P.M., Morrison, A., Definition of nonresponse to analgesic treatment of arthritic pain: an analytical literature review of the smallest detectable difference, the minimal detectable change, and the minimal clinically important difference on the pain visual analog scale. Int J Inflamm, 2011, 2011, 231926.
14. Guyatt, G.H., Osoba, D., Wu, A.W., Wyrwich, K.W., Norman, G.R., Clinical significance consensus meeting group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 77 (2002), 371–383.
15. Deyo, R.A., Centor, R.M., Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 39 (1986), 897–906.
16. Auffinger, B., Lam, S., Shen, J., Thaci, B., Roitberg, B.Z., Usefulness of minimum clinically important difference for assessing patients with subaxial degenerative cervical spine disease: statistical versus substantial clinical benefit. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 155 (2013), 2345–2354 discussion 2355.
17. Beurskens, A.J., de Vet, H.C., Köke, A.J., Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65 (1996), 71–76.
18. Carreon, L.Y., Glassman, S.D., Campbell, M.J., Anderson, P.A., 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 10 (2010), 469–474.
19. Childs, J.D., Piva, S.R., Fritz, J.M., Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 30 (2005), 1331–1334.
20. Cleland, J.A., Childs, J.D., Whitman, J.M., Psychometric properties of the neck disability index and numeric pain rating scale in patients with mechanical neck pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 89 (2008), 69–74.
21. Coelho, R.A., Siqueira, F.B., Ferreira, P.H., Ferreira, M.L., Responsiveness of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the oswestry disability index in subjects with low back pain. Eur Spine J 17 (2008), 1101–1106.
22. Colangelo, K.J., Pope, J.E., Peschken, C., The minimally important difference for patient reported outcomes in systemic lupus erythematosus including the HAQ-DI, pain, fatigue, and SF-36. J Rheumatol 36 (2009), 2231–2237.
23. Copay, A.G., Glassman, S.D., Subach, B.R., Berven, S., Schuler, T.C., Carreon, L.Y., 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 8 (2008), 968–974.
24. Crossley, K.M., Bennell, K.L., Cowan, S.M., Green, S., Analysis of outcome measures for persons with patellofemoral pain: which are reliable and valid?. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 85 (2004), 815–822.
25. Dhanani, S., Quenneville, J., Perron, M., Abdolell, M., Feldman, B.M., Minimal difference in pain associated with change in quality of life in children with rheumatic disease. Arthritis Rheum 47 (2002), 501–505.
26. Dunkl, P.R., Taylor, A.G., McConnell, G.G., Alfano, A.P., Conaway, M.R., Responsiveness of fibromyalgia clinical trial outcome measures. J Rheumatol 27 (2000), 2683–2691.
27. Eberle, E., Ottillinger, B., Clinically relevant change and clinically relevant difference in knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 7 (1999), 502–503.
28. Emshoff, R., Emshoff, I., Bertram, S., Estimation of clinically important change for visual analog scales measuring chronic temporomandibular disorder pain. J Orofac Pain 24 (2010), 262–269.
29. Emshoff, R., Bertram, S., Emshoff, I., Clinically important difference thresholds of the visual analog scale: a conceptual model for identifying meaningful intraindividual changes for pain intensity. Pain 152 (2011), 2277–2282.
30. Farrar, J.T., Young, J.P. Jr., LaMoreaux, L., Werth, J.L., Poole, R.M., Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 94 (2001), 149–158.
31. Farrar, J.T., Pritchett, Y.L., Robinson, M., Prakash, A., Chappell, A., The clinical importance of changes in the 0 to 10 numeric rating scale for worst, least, and average pain intensity: analyses of data from clinical trials of duloxetine in pain disorders. J Pain 11 (2010), 109–118.
32. Forouzanfar, T., Weber, W.E., Kemler, M., van Kleef, M., What is a meaningful pain reduction in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1?. Clin J Pain 19 (2003), 281–285.
33. Giraudeau, B., Rozenberg, S., Valat, J.-P., Assessment of the clinically relevant change in pain for patients with sciatica. Ann Rheum Dis 63 (2004), 1180–1181.
34. Grotle, M., Brox, J.I., Vøllestad, N.K., Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain. Spine 29 (2004), E492–E501.
35. Gum, J.L., Glassman, S.D., Carreon, L.Y., Clinically important deterioration in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery: a choice of evaluation methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and pain scales: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19 (2013), 564–568.
36. Hanley, M.A., Jensen, M.P., Ehde, D.M., Robinson, L.R., Cardenas, D.D., Turner, J.A., et al. Clinically significant change in pain intensity ratings in persons with spinal cord injury or amputation. Clin J Pain 22 (2006), 25–31.
37. Hirschfeld, G., Wager, J., Schmidt, P., Zernikow, B., Minimally clinically significant differences for adolescents with chronic pain-variability of ROC-based cut points. J Pain 15 (2014), 32–39.
38. Hägg, O., Fritzell, P., Nordwall, A., Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12 (2003), 12–20.
39. ten Klooster, P.M., Drossaers-Bakker, K.W., Taal, E., van de Laar, M.A., Patient-perceived satisfactory improvement (PPSI): interpreting meaningful change in pain from the patient's perspective. Pain 121 (2006), 151–157.
40. Kovacs, F.M., Abraira, V., Royuela, A., Corcoll, J., Alegre, L., Cano, A., et al. Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity and disability in patients with nonspecific low back pain. [Miscellaneous article]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32 (2007), 2915–2920.
41. Kovacs, F.M., Bagó J., Royuela, A., Seco, J., Giménez, S., Muriel, A., et al. Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 9, 2008, 42.
42. Kvamme, M.K., Kristiansen, I.S., Lie, E., Kvien, T.K., Identification of cutpoints for acceptable health status and important improvement in patient-reported outcomes, in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 37 (2010), 26–31.
43. Kwok, T., Pope, J.E., Minimally important difference for patient-reported outcomes in psoriatic arthritis: health Assessment Questionnaire and pain, fatigue, and global visual analog scales. J Rheumatol 37 (2010), 1024–1028.
44. Lauche, R., Langhorst, J., Dobos, G.J., Cramer, H., Clinically meaningful differences in pain, disability and quality of life for chronic nonspecific neck pain - a reanalysis of 4 randomized controlled trials of cupping therapy. Complement Ther Med 21 (2013), 342–347.
45. Lauridsen, H.H., Hartvigsen, J., Manniche, C., Korsholm, L., Grunnet-Nilsson, N., Danish version of the oswestry disability index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations. Eur Spine J 15 (2006), 1717–1728.
46. Lauridsen, H.H., Hartvigsen, J., Manniche, C., Korsholm, L., Grunnet-Nilsson, N., Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 7, 2006, 82.
47. Lauridsen, H.H., Manniche, C., Korsholm, L., Grunnet-Nilsson, N., Hartvigsen, J., What is an acceptable outcome of treatment before it begins? Methodological considerations and implications for patients with chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 18 (2009), 1858–1866.
48. Mannion, A.F., Junge, A., Fairbank, J.C.T., Dvorak, J., Grob, D., Development of a German version of the oswestry disability index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Eur Spine J 15 (2006), 55–65.
49. Maughan, E.F., Lewis, J.S., Outcome measures in chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 19 (2010), 1484–1494.
50. Mesrian, A., Neubauer, E., Schiltenwolf, M., Reduction in pain intensity after treatment for chronic back pain. When is it clinically meaningful?. Schmerz, 21, 2007, 212 214–7.
51. Parker, S.L., Adogwa, O., Paul, A.R., Anderson, W.N., Aaronson, O., Cheng, J.S., 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 14 (2011), 598–604.
52. Parker, S.L., Mendenhall, S.K., Shau, D.N., Adogwa, O., Anderson, W.N., Devin, C.J., et al. Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance. J Neurosurg Spine 16 (2012), 471–478.
53. Parker, S.L., Mendenhall, S.K., Shau, D., Adogwa, O., Cheng, J.S., Anderson, W.N., et al. Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after extension of fusion for adjacent-segment disease. J Neurosurg Spine 16 (2012), 61–67.
54. Parker, S.L., Godil, S.S., Shau, D.N., Mendenhall, S.K., McGirt, M.J., Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 18 (2013), 154–160.
55. Parker, S.L., Godil, S.S., Zuckerman, S.L., Mendenhall, S.K., Wells, J.A., Shau, D.N., et al. Comprehensive assessment of 1-year outcomes and determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after suboccipital decompression for chiari malformation I in adults. Neurosurgery 73 (2013), 569–581 discussion 581.
56. Perrot, S., Bertin, P., “Feeling better” or “feeling well” in usual care of hip and knee osteoarthritis pain: determination of cutoff points for patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) at rest and on movement in a national multicenter cohort study of 2414 patients with painful osteoarthritis. Pain 154 (2013), 248–256.
57. Pool, J.J.M., Ostelo, R.W.J.G., Hoving, J.L., Bouter, L.M., de Vet, H.C.W., Minimal clinically important change of the neck disability index and the numerical rating scale for patients with neck pain. Spine 32 (2007), 3047–3051.
58. Pope, J.E., Khanna, D., Norrie, D., Ouimet, J.M., The minimally important difference for the health assessment questionnaire in rheumatoid arthritis clinical practice is smaller than in randomized controlled trials. J Rheumatol 36 (2009), 254–259.
59. Reddy, V.K., Parker, S.L., Patrawala, S.A., Lockney, D.T., Su, P.-F., Mericle, R.A., Microvascular decompression for classic trigeminal neuralgia: determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain improvement for patient reported outcomes. Neurosurgery 72 (2013), 749–754 discussion 754.
60. Reddy, V.K., Parker, S.L., Lockney, D.T., Patrawala, S.A., Su, P.-F., Mericle, R.A., Percutaneous stereotactic radiofrequency lesioning for trigeminal neuralgia: determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain improvement for patient-reported outcomes. [Miscellaneous article]. Neurosurg 74 (2014), 262–266.
61. van der Roer, N., Ostelo, R.W.J.G., Bekkering, G.E., van Tulder, M.W., de Vet, H.C.W., Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status, and general health status in patients with nonspecific low back pain. Spine 31 (2006), 578–582.
62. Salaffi, F., Stancati, A., Silvestri, C.A., Ciapetti, A., Grassi, W., Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskeletal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale. Eur J Pain 8 (2004), 283–291.
63. Saps, M., Lavigne, J.V., Abdominal pain endpoints currently recommended by the FDA and EMA for adult patients with irritable bowel syndrome may not be reliable in children. Neurogastroenterol Motil 27 (2015), 849–855.
64. Sekhon, S., Pope, J. Canadian Scleroderma Research Group, Baron, M., The minimally important difference in clinical practice for patient-centered outcomes including health assessment questionnaire, fatigue, pain, sleep, global visual analog scale, and SF-36 in scleroderma. J Rheumatol 37 (2010), 591–598.
65. Sheldon, E.A., Bird, S.R., Smugar, S.S., Tershakovec, A.M., Correlation of measures of pain, function, and overall response: results pooled from two identical studies of etoricoxib in chronic low back pain. Spine 33 (2008), 533–538.
66. Solberg, T., Johnsen, L.G., Nygaard, Ø.P., Grotle, M., Can we define success criteria for lumbar disc surgery? : estimates for a substantial amount of improvement in core outcome measures. Acta Orthop 84 (2013), 196–201.
67. Strand, L.I., Ljunggren, A.E., Bogen, B., Ask, T., Johnsen, T.B., The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire as an outcome measure: test-retest reliability and responsiveness to change. Eur J Pain 12 (2008), 917–925.
68. Tashjian, R.Z., Deloach, J., Porucznik, C.A., Powell, A.P., Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18 (2009), 927–932.
69. Tubach, F., Wells, G.A., Ravaud, P., Dougados, M., Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: methodological issues. J Rheumatol 32 (2005), 2025–2029.
70. Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Baron, G., Falissard, B., Logeart, I., Bellamy, N., et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis 64 (2005), 34–37.
71. Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Martin-Mola, E., Awada, H., Bellamy, N., Bombardier, C., et al. Minimum clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state in pain and function in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic back pain, hand osteoarthritis, and hip and knee osteoarthritis: results from a prospective multinational study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 64 (2012), 1699–1707.
72. de Vet, H.C., Ostelo, R.W., Terwee, C.B., van der Roer, N., Knol, D.L., Beckerman, H., et al. Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res 16 (2007), 131–142.
73. de Vet, H.C., Foumani, M., Scholten, M.A., Jacobs, W.C., Stiggelbout, A.M., Knol, D.L., et al. Minimally important change values of a measurement instrument depend more on baseline values than on the type of intervention. J Clin Epidemiol 68 (2015), 518–524.
74. Wheaton, L., Pope, J., The minimally important difference for patient-reported outcomes in spondyloarthropathies including pain, fatigue, sleep, and health assessment questionnaire. J Rheumatol 37 (2010), 816–822.
75. Young, I.A., Cleland, J.A., Michener, L.A., Brown, C., Reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the neck disability index, patient-specific functional scale, and numeric pain rating scale in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 89 (2010), 831–839.
76. Beurskens, A.J., de Vet, H.C., Köke, A.J., van der Heijden, G.J., Knipschild, P.G., Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain. Assessment of the quality of four disease-specific questionnaires. Spine 20 (1995), 1017–1028.
77. Lambert, P.C., Sutton, A.J., Abrams, K.R., Jones, D.R., A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 55 (2002), 86–94.
78. Guyatt, G.H., Townsend, M., Keller, J.L., Singer, J., Should study subjects see their previous responses: data from a randomized control trial. J Clin Epidemiol 42 (1989), 913–920.
79. Doganay Erdogan, B., Leung, Y.Y., Pohl, C., Tennant, A., Conaghan, P.G., Minimal clinically important difference as applied in rheumatology: an OMERACT rasch working group systematic review and critique. J Rheumatol 43 (2016), 194–202.
80. Bombardier, C., Hayden, J., Beaton, D.E., Minimal clinically important difference. Low back pain: outcome measures. J Rheumatol 28 (2001), 431–438.
81. Ferreira, M.L., Herbert, R.D., Ferreira, P.H., Latimer, J., Ostelo, R.W., Nascimento, D.P., et al. A critical review of methods used to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for low back pain. J Clin Epidemiol 65 (2012), 253–261.
82. Olsen, M.F., Bjerre, E., Hansen, M.D., Hilden, J., Landler, N.E., Tendal, B., et al. Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain. BMC Med, 15, 2017, 35.
83. Rouquette, A., Blanchin, M., Sébille, V., Guillemin, F., Côté S.M., Falissard, B., et al. The minimal clinically important difference determined using item response theory models: an attempt to solve the issue of the association with baseline score. J Clin Epidemiol 67 (2014), 433–440.
84. Lauridsen, H.H., Hartvigsen, J., Korsholm, L., Grunnet-Nilsson, N., Manniche, C., Choice of external criteria in back pain research: does it matter? Recommendations based on analysis of responsiveness. Pain 131 (2007), 112–120.
85. Jensen, M.P., Chen, C., Brugger, A.M., Postsurgical pain outcome assessment. Pain 99 (2002), 101–109.
86. Ferreira, M.L., Herbert, R.D., Ferreira, P.H., Latimer, J., Ostelo, R.W., Grotle, M., et al. The smallest worthwhile effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and physiotherapy for chronic low back pain: a benefit-harm trade-off study. J Clin Epidemiol 66 (2013), 1397–1404.
87. Carragee, E.J., The rise and fall of the “minimum clinically important difference.”. Spine J 10 (2010), 283–284.
88. Ferreira, M.L., Ferreira, P.H., Herbert, R.D., Latimer, J., People with low back pain typically need to feel “much better” to consider intervention worthwhile: an observational study. Aust J Physiother 55 (2009), 123–127.
89. Barrett, B., Sufficiently important difference: concepts, caveats, and challenges. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 869–874.
90. Mercadante, S., Adile, C., Torta, R., Varetto, A., Fulfaro, F., Giarratano, A., et al. Meaningful cut-off pain intensity for breakthrough pain changes in advanced cancer patients. Curr Med Res Opin 29 (2013), 93–97.
91. Moore, R.A., Straube, S., Aldington, D., Pain measures and cut-offs - “no worse than mild pain” as a simple, universal outcome. Anaesthesia 68 (2013), 400–412.
92. Robinson, K.A., Saldanha, I.J., McKoy, N.A., Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 1325–1330.
93. Beaton, D.E., Boers, M., Wells, G.A., Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 14 (2002), 109–114.
94. Ruyssen-Witrand, A., Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Systematic review reveals heterogeneity in definition of a clinically relevant difference in pain. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 463–470.
95. Terwee, C.B., Roorda, L.D., Dekker, J., Bierma-Zeinstra, S.M., Peat, G., Jordan, K.P., et al. Mind the MIC: large variation among populations and methods. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010), 524–534.
96. Dworkin, R.H., Turk, D.C., McDermott, M.P., Peirce-Sandner, S., Burke, L.B., Cowan, P., et al. Interpreting the clinical importance of group differences in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 146 (2009), 238–244.