{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,17]],"date-time":"2026-05-17T08:03:32Z","timestamp":1779005012005,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":125,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"8","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]],"date-time":"2025-04-16T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1744761600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]],"date-time":"2025-04-16T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1744761600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000924","name":"Multiple Sclerosis Australia","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["19-0702"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["19-0702"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000924","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000924","name":"Multiple Sclerosis Australia","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["23-0125"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["23-0125"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000924","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100001249","name":"University of Tasmania","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100001249","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur J Health Econ"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Introduction<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Minimum important changes (MICs) represent thresholds for clinically meaningful change. Multi-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs) generate health state utilities (holistic measures of health-related quality of life). No systematic review of MICs specifically for MAUIs has been conducted. In addition, no guidelines for estimating MICs for MAUIs have been proposed. We aimed to correct these evidence gaps by producing guidelines contextualised by a systematic review.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We searched ten databases for relevant records using various search terms. Extracted data were analysed narratively and descriptively. The presence of key reporting items (relating to precision, sensitivity, and concurrent validity) was also evaluated. Guidelines for MIC estimation were informed by the broader MIC literature and contextualised using study results.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The review identified 5035 non-duplicate records, with 68 entering the study. 282 unique, anchor-based MICs were extracted. Of these MICs, 119 (42.20%) pertained to the EQ-5D-3L, 82 (29.08%) to the EQ-5D-5L, and 50 (17.73%) to the SF-6D.v1. The most common anchor-based method used to estimate MICs (107, 37.94%) involved taking the mean change score for a group considered to have experienced a MIC. Distribution-based methods were also common, appearing in 31 (45.59%) of the included studies. The inclusion of key reporting items was generally deficient.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Deficiencies in reporting and diverse estimation methods raise concerns regarding the extant MAUI MIC literature. Researchers should exercise caution when using existing MAUI MICs. Recommendations presented in our study may assist researchers in effectively estimating MICs for use in health economics.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]],"date-time":"2025-04-16T10:35:53Z","timestamp":1744799753000},"page":"1383-1399","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["A systematic review of minimum important changes for generic multi-attribute utility instruments and recommendations for their estimation"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"26","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1237-5710","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Glen J.","family":"Henson","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9009-7472","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ingrid","family":"van der Mei","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2807-0070","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Bruce V.","family":"Taylor","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-5931-642X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Paul","family":"Scuffham","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8385-5965","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Gang","family":"Chen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1820-6758","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Julie A.","family":"Campbell","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]]},"reference":[{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"344","DOI":"10.3109\/07853890109002088","volume":"33","author":"M Drummond","year":"2001","unstructured":"Drummond, M.: Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Ann. Med. 33(5), 344\u2013349 (2001). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3109\/07853890109002088","journal-title":"Ann. Med."},{"key":"1778_CR2","volume-title":"Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes","author":"MF Drummond","year":"2015","unstructured":"Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M.J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G.L., Torrance, G.W.: Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press (2015)"},{"key":"1778_CR3","unstructured":"Iezzi, A., Richardson, J.: Measuring Quality of Life at the Centre for Health Economics: fescription of instruments, interview props and their administration. 41 (2009). https:\/\/www.aqol.com.au\/papers\/researchpaper41.pdf"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"311","DOI":"10.1007\/s40271-015-0157-5","volume":"9","author":"JA Campbell","year":"2016","unstructured":"Campbell, J.A., Palmer, A.J., Venn, A., Sharman, M., Otahal, P., Neil, A.: A Head-to-head comparison of the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D multi-attribute utility instruments in patients who have previously undergone bariatric surgery. Patient 9(4), 311\u2013322 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s40271-015-0157-5","journal-title":"Patient"},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1727","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-011-9903-x","volume":"20","author":"M Herdman","year":"2011","unstructured":"Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., et al.: Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual. Life Res. 20(10), 1727\u20131736 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-011-9903-x","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2729","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-021-02925-y","volume":"30","author":"CB Terwee","year":"2021","unstructured":"Terwee, C.B., Peipert, J.D., Chapman, R., et al.: Minimal important change (MIC): a conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures. Qual. Life Res. 30(10), 2729\u20132754 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-021-02925-y","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"704","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2016.06.001","volume":"19","author":"SE Wolowacz","year":"2016","unstructured":"Wolowacz, S.E., Briggs, A., Belozeroff, V., et al.: Estimating health-state utility for economic models in clinical studies: an ISPOR good research practices task force report. Value Health 19(6), 704\u2013719 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2016.06.001","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e062703","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2022-062703","volume":"12","author":"GJ Henson","year":"2022","unstructured":"Henson, G.J., Taylor, B.V., van der Mei, I., et al.: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of minimal important differences for generic multiattribute utility instruments. BMJ Open 12(10), e062703 (2022). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2022-062703","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/2046-4053-4-1","volume":"4","author":"D Moher","year":"2015","unstructured":"Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., et al.: Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 4(1), 1 (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/2046-4053-4-1","journal-title":"Syst. Rev."},{"key":"1778_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"n71","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.n71","volume":"372","author":"MJ Page","year":"2021","unstructured":"Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., et al.: The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372, n71 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.n71","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"117","DOI":"10.1017\/S0266462313000160","volume":"29","author":"D Husereau","year":"2013","unstructured":"Husereau, D., Drummond, M., Petrou, S., et al.: Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 29(2), 117\u2013122 (2013)","journal-title":"Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"171","DOI":"10.1586\/erp.11.9","volume":"11","author":"MT King","year":"2011","unstructured":"King, M.T.: A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 11(2), 171\u2013184 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1586\/erp.11.9","journal-title":"Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res."},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"407","DOI":"10.1016\/0197-2456(89)90005-6","volume":"10","author":"R Jaeschke","year":"1989","unstructured":"Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., Guyatt, G.H.: Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control. Clin. Trials 10(4), 407\u2013415 (1989). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/0197-2456(89)90005-6","journal-title":"Control. Clin. Trials"},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"599","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-014-0787-4","volume":"24","author":"S Alanne","year":"2015","unstructured":"Alanne, S., Roine, R.P., Rasanen, P., Vainiola, T., Sintonen, H.: Estimating the minimum important change in the 15D scores. Qual. Life Res. 24(3), 599\u2013606 (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-014-0787-4","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"key":"1778_CR15","unstructured":"United States Food and Drug Administration: Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims (2009). https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/regulatory-information\/search-fda-guidance-documents\/patient-reported-outcome-measures-use-medical-product-development-support-labeling-claims"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"593","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1475-6773.2005.00374.x","volume":"40","author":"HJ Schunemann","year":"2005","unstructured":"Schunemann, H.J., Guyatt, G.H.: Commentary\u2014Goodbye M(C)ID! Hello MID, where do you come from? Health Serv. Res. 40(2), 593\u2013597 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1475-6773.2005.00374.x","journal-title":"Health Serv. Res."},{"key":"1778_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"54","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-4-54","volume":"4","author":"HC de Vet","year":"2006","unstructured":"de Vet, H.C., Terwee, C.B., Ostelo, R.W., Beckerman, H., Knol, D.L., Bouter, L.M.: Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 4, 54 (2006). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-4-54","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"371","DOI":"10.4065\/77.4.371","volume":"77","author":"GH Guyatt","year":"2002","unstructured":"Guyatt, G.H., Osoba, D., Wu, A.W., Wyrwich, K.W., Norman, G.R., the Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group: Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin. Proc. 77(4), 371\u2013383 (2002). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4065\/77.4.371","journal-title":"Mayo Clin. Proc."},{"key":"1778_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"m1714","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.m1714","volume":"369","author":"T Devji","year":"2020","unstructured":"Devji, T., Carrasco-Labra, A., Qasim, A., et al.: Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability study. BMJ 369, m1714 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.m1714","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"285","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-004-0705-2","volume":"14","author":"KW Wyrwich","year":"2005","unstructured":"Wyrwich, K.W., Bullinger, M., Aaronson, N., et al.: Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes. Qual. Life Res. 14(2), 285\u2013295 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-004-0705-2","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1223","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-023-03413-1","volume":"32","author":"A Trigg","year":"2023","unstructured":"Trigg, A., Lenderking, W.R., Boehnke, J.R.: Introduction to the special section: \u201cmethodologies and considerations for meaningful change.\u201d Qual. Life Res. 32(5), 1223\u20131230 (2023). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-023-03413-1","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"key":"1778_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"61","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2020.11.024","volume":"133","author":"A Carrasco-Labra","year":"2021","unstructured":"Carrasco-Labra, A., Devji, T., Qasim, A., et al.: Minimal important difference estimates for patient-reported outcomes: a systematic survey. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 133, 61\u201371 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2020.11.024","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"key":"1778_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"225","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005","volume":"69","author":"P Whiting","year":"2016","unstructured":"Whiting, P., Savovic, J., Higgins, J.P., et al.: ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 69, 225\u2013234 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"7650","key":"1778_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"924","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.39489.470347.AD","volume":"336","author":"GH Guyatt","year":"2008","unstructured":"Guyatt, G.H., Oxman, A.D., Vist, G.E., et al.: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336(7650), 924\u2013926 (2008). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.39489.470347.AD","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"107","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x","volume":"62","author":"S Elo","year":"2008","unstructured":"Elo, S., Kyngas, H.: The qualitative content analysis process. J. Adv. Nurs. 62(1), 107\u2013115 (2008). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x","journal-title":"J. Adv. Nurs."},{"issue":"12","key":"1778_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1122","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2012.10.006","volume":"12","author":"SL Parker","year":"2012","unstructured":"Parker, S.L., Adogwa, O., Mendenhall, S.K., et al.: Determination of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in pain, disability, and quality of life after revision fusion for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis. Spine J. 12(12), 1122\u20131128 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.spinee.2012.10.006","journal-title":"Spine J."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"598","DOI":"10.3171\/2010.12.SPINE10472","volume":"14","author":"SL Parker","year":"2011","unstructured":"Parker, S.L., Adogwa, O., Paul, A.R., 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(5), 598\u2013604 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2010.12.SPINE10472","journal-title":"J. Neurosurg. Spine"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"154","DOI":"10.3171\/2012.10.SPINE12312","volume":"18","author":"SL Parker","year":"2013","unstructured":"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(2), 154\u2013160 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2012.10.SPINE12312","journal-title":"J. Neurosurg. Spine"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"569","DOI":"10.1227\/NEU.0000000000000032","volume":"73","author":"SL Parker","year":"2013","unstructured":"Parker, S.L., Godil, S.S., Zuckerman, S.L., 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(4), 569\u2013581 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1227\/NEU.0000000000000032. (discussion 581)","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"61","DOI":"10.3171\/2011.8.SPINE1194","volume":"16","author":"SL Parker","year":"2012","unstructured":"Parker, S.L., Mendenhall, S.K., Shau, D., 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(1), 61\u201367 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2011.8.SPINE1194","journal-title":"J. Neurosurg. Spine"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"471","DOI":"10.3171\/2012.1.SPINE11842","volume":"16","author":"SL Parker","year":"2012","unstructured":"Parker, S.L., Mendenhall, S.K., Shau, D.N., 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(5), 471\u2013478 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2012.1.SPINE11842","journal-title":"J. Neurosurg. Spine"},{"issue":"24","key":"1778_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1925","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000001653","volume":"41","author":"SL Zuckerman","year":"2016","unstructured":"Zuckerman, S.L., Chotai, S., Devin, C.J., et al.: Surgical resection of intradural extramedullary spinal tumors: patient reported outcomes and minimum clinically important difference. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(24), 1925\u20131932 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/BRS.0000000000001653","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"E2","DOI":"10.3171\/2017.10.FOCUS17554","volume":"44","author":"AL Asher","year":"2018","unstructured":"Asher, A.L., Kerezoudis, P., Mummaneni, P.V., et al.: Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database. Neurosurg. Focus 44(1), E2 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2017.10.FOCUS17554","journal-title":"Neurosurg. Focus"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.1186\/s12890-020-1116-z","volume":"20","author":"E Bae","year":"2020","unstructured":"Bae, E., Choi, S.E., Lee, H., Shin, G., Kang, D.: Validity of EQ-5D utility index and minimal clinically important difference estimation among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMC Pulm. Med. 20(1), 73 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12890-020-1116-z","journal-title":"BMC Pulm. Med."},{"issue":"11","key":"1778_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2897","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-018-1929-x","volume":"27","author":"A Bilbao","year":"2018","unstructured":"Bilbao, A., Garcia-Perez, L., Arenaza, J.C., et al.: Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: reliability, validity and responsiveness. Qual. Life Res. 27(11), 2897\u20132908 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-018-1929-x","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"8","key":"1778_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"865","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.10.004","volume":"63","author":"JP Browne","year":"2010","unstructured":"Browne, J.P., van der Meulen, J.H., Lewsey, J.D., Lamping, D.L., Black, N.: Mathematical coupling may account for the association between baseline severity and minimally important difference values. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 63(8), 865\u2013874 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.10.004","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1585","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-015-1196-z","volume":"25","author":"P Chen","year":"2016","unstructured":"Chen, P., Lin, K.C., Liing, R.J., Wu, C.Y., Chen, C.L., Chang, K.C.: Validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference of EQ-5D-5L in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. Qual. Life Res. 25(6), 1585\u20131596 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-015-1196-z","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1311","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-018-1808-5","volume":"27","author":"BL Conner-Spady","year":"2018","unstructured":"Conner-Spady, B.L., Marshall, D.A., Bohm, E., Dunbar, M.J., Noseworthy, T.W.: Comparing the validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L to the Oxford hip and knee scores and SF-12 in osteoarthritis patients 1 year following total joint replacement. Qual. Life Res. 27(5), 1311\u20131322 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-018-1808-5","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"264","DOI":"10.1111\/apt.13852","volume":"45","author":"BG Feagan","year":"2017","unstructured":"Feagan, B.G., Patel, H., Colombel, J.F., et al.: Effects of vedolizumab on health-related quality of life in patients with ulcerative colitis: results from the randomised GEMINI 1 trial. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 45(2), 264\u2013275 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/apt.13852","journal-title":"Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"34","DOI":"10.1331\/JAPhA.2012.10114","volume":"52","author":"PK Gandhi","year":"2012","unstructured":"Gandhi, P.K., Ried, L.D., Bibbey, A., Huang, I.C.: SF-6D utility index as measure of minimally important difference in health status change. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. (2003) 52(1), 34\u201342 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1331\/JAPhA.2012.10114","journal-title":"J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. (2003)"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"585","DOI":"10.1227\/NEU.0000000000001196","volume":"78","author":"GS Gandhoke","year":"2016","unstructured":"Gandhoke, G.S., Shin, H.M., Chang, Y.F., et al.: A cost-effectiveness comparison between open transforaminal and minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusions using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at 2-year follow-up. Neurosurgery 78(4), 585\u2013595 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1227\/NEU.0000000000001196","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"732","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2010.12.004","volume":"14","author":"SA Gerhards","year":"2011","unstructured":"Gerhards, S.A., Huibers, M.J., Theunissen, K.A., de Graaf, L.E., Widdershoven, G.A., Evers, S.M.: The responsiveness of quality of life utilities to change in depression: a comparison of instruments (SF-6D, EQ-5D, and DFD). Value Health 14(5), 732\u2013739 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2010.12.004","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"9","key":"1778_CR43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2497","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-017-1599-0","volume":"26","author":"N Gutacker","year":"2017","unstructured":"Gutacker, N., Street, A.: Use of large-scale HRQoL datasets to generate individualised predictions and inform patients about the likely benefit of surgery. Qual. Life Res. 26(9), 2497\u20132505 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-017-1599-0","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"265.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.11.1094","volume":"220","author":"HS Harvie","year":"2019","unstructured":"Harvie, H.S., Honeycutt, A.A., Neuwahl, S.J., et al.: Responsiveness and minimally important difference of SF-6D and EQ-5D utility scores for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 220(3), 265.e1-265.e11 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.11.1094","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"136","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-842x.2005.tb00063.x","volume":"29","author":"G Hawthorne","year":"2005","unstructured":"Hawthorne, G., Osborne, R.: Population norms and meaningful differences for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) measure. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 29(2), 136\u2013142 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1467-842x.2005.tb00063.x","journal-title":"Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health"},{"issue":"7","key":"1778_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"936","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2020.03.003","volume":"23","author":"EB Henry","year":"2020","unstructured":"Henry, E.B., Barry, L.E., Hobbins, A.P., McClure, N.S., O\u2019Neill, C.: Estimation of an instrument-defined minimally important difference in EQ-5D-5L index scores based on scoring algorithms derived using the EQ-VT version 2 valuation protocols. Value Health 23(7), 936\u2013944 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2020.03.003","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"110","DOI":"10.4193\/Rhin18.122","volume":"57","author":"LP Hoehle","year":"2019","unstructured":"Hoehle, L.P., Phillips, K.M., Speth, M.M., Caradonna, D.S., Gray, S.T., Sedaghat, A.R.: Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for the EQ-5D in chronic rhinosinusitis. Rhinology 57(2), 110\u2013116 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4193\/Rhin18.122","journal-title":"Rhinology"},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1376","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2017.05.022","volume":"20","author":"K Hosseini","year":"2017","unstructured":"Hosseini, K., Omorou, A.Y., Hubert, J., Ngueyon Sime, W., Ladriere, M., Guillemin, F.: Nephrectomy complication is a risk factor of clinically meaningful decrease in health utility among living kidney donors. Value Health 20(10), 1376\u20131382 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2017.05.022","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"7","key":"1778_CR49","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"638","DOI":"10.1016\/j.joca.2012.03.019","volume":"20","author":"FM Impellizzeri","year":"2012","unstructured":"Impellizzeri, F.M., Mannion, A.F., Naal, F.D., Hersche, O., Leunig, M.: The early outcome of surgical treatment for femoroacetabular impingement: success depends on how you measure it. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 20(7), 638\u2013645 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.joca.2012.03.019","journal-title":"Osteoarthritis Cartilage"},{"issue":"8","key":"1778_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e3053","DOI":"10.1002\/dmrr.3053","volume":"34","author":"X Jin","year":"2018","unstructured":"Jin, X., Liu, G.G., Gerstein, H.C., et al.: Minimally important difference and predictors of change in quality of life in type 2 diabetes: a community-based survey in China. Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. 34(8), e3053 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/dmrr.3053","journal-title":"Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev."},{"key":"1778_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"148","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2474-14-148","volume":"14","author":"LG Johnsen","year":"2013","unstructured":"Johnsen, L.G., Hellum, C., Nygaard, O.P., et al.: Comparison of the SF6D, the EQ5D, and the oswestry disability index in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc disease. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 14, 148 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2474-14-148","journal-title":"BMC Musculoskelet. Disord."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"91","DOI":"10.1081\/copd-200052090","volume":"2","author":"RM Kaplan","year":"2005","unstructured":"Kaplan, R.M.: The minimally clinically important difference in generic utility-based measures. COPD 2(1), 91\u201397 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1081\/copd-200052090","journal-title":"COPD"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1234","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-019-05945-y","volume":"28","author":"S Kato","year":"2019","unstructured":"Kato, S., Oshima, Y., Matsubayashi, Y., Taniguchi, Y., Tanaka, S., Takeshita, K.: Minimum clinically important difference in outcome scores among patients undergoing cervical laminoplasty. Eur. Spine J. 28(5), 1234\u20131241 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-019-05945-y","journal-title":"Eur. Spine J."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1083","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-007-9207-3","volume":"16","author":"D Khanna","year":"2007","unstructured":"Khanna, D., Furst, D.E., Wong, W.K., et al.: Reliability, validity, and minimally important differences of the SF-6D in systemic sclerosis. Qual. Life Res. 16(6), 1083\u20131092 (2007). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-007-9207-3","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"key":"1778_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1186\/s12955-015-0227-3","volume":"13","author":"SK Kim","year":"2015","unstructured":"Kim, S.K., Kim, S.H., Jo, M.W., Lee, S.I.: Estimation of minimally important differences in the EQ-5D and SF-6D indices and their utility in stroke. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13, 32 (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12955-015-0227-3","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"key":"1778_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"66","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-12-66","volume":"12","author":"CG Kohn","year":"2014","unstructured":"Kohn, C.G., Sidovar, M.F., Kaur, K., Zhu, Y., Coleman, C.I.: Estimating a minimal clinically important difference for the EuroQol 5-Dimension health status index in persons with multiple sclerosis. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 12, 66 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-12-66","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"330","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0609.2011.01665.x","volume":"87","author":"AK Kvam","year":"2011","unstructured":"Kvam, A.K., Fayers, P.M., Wisloff, F.: Responsiveness and minimal important score differences in quality-of-life questionnaires: a comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30 cancer-specific questionnaire to the generic utility questionnaires EQ-5D and 15D in patients with multiple myeloma. Eur. J. Haematol. 87(4), 330\u2013337 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1600-0609.2011.01665.x","journal-title":"Eur. J. Haematol."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"26","DOI":"10.3899\/jrheum.090449","volume":"37","author":"MK Kvamme","year":"2010","unstructured":"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(1), 26\u201331 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3899\/jrheum.090449","journal-title":"J. Rheumatol."},{"issue":"2 Suppl 76","key":"1778_CR59","first-page":"50","volume":"31","author":"L Kwakkenbos","year":"2013","unstructured":"Kwakkenbos, L., Fransen, J., Vonk, M.C., et al.: A comparison of the measurement properties and estimation of minimal important differences of the EQ-5D and SF-6D utility measures in patients with systemic sclerosis. Clin. Exp. Rheumatol. 31(2 Suppl 76), 50\u201356 (2013)","journal-title":"Clin. Exp. Rheumatol."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"125","DOI":"10.1186\/s12955-021-01762-4","volume":"19","author":"AN Lamu","year":"2021","unstructured":"Lamu, A.N., Bjorkman, L., Hamre, H.J., Alraek, T., Musial, F., Robberstad, B.: Validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with health complaints attributed to their amalgam fillings: a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing amalgam removal. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 19(1), 125 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12955-021-01762-4","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"key":"1778_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"59","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-11-59","volume":"11","author":"QA Le","year":"2013","unstructured":"Le, Q.A., Doctor, J.N., Zoellner, L.A., Feeny, N.C.: Minimal clinically important differences for the EQ-5D and QWB-SA in Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): results from a Doubly Randomized Preference Trial (DRPT). Health Qual. Life Outcomes 11, 59 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-11-59","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"680","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1524-4733.2007.00311.x","volume":"11","author":"BB Lee","year":"2008","unstructured":"Lee, B.B., King, M.T., Simpson, J.M., et al.: Validity, responsiveness, and minimal important difference for the SF-6D health utility scale in a spinal cord injured population. Value Health 11(4), 680\u2013688 (2008). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1524-4733.2007.00311.x","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR63","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"197","DOI":"10.1089\/thy.2016.0260","volume":"27","author":"CC Lubitz","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lubitz, C.C., De Gregorio, L., Fingeret, A.L., et al.: Measurement and variation in estimation of quality of life effects of patients undergoing treatment for papillary thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid 27(2), 197\u2013206 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1089\/thy.2016.0260","journal-title":"Thyroid"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR64","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"365","DOI":"10.1097\/mlr.0b013e3181c162a2","volume":"48","author":"N Luo","year":"2010","unstructured":"Luo, N., Johnson, J., Coons, S.J.: Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med. Care 48(4), 365\u2013371 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/mlr.0b013e3181c162a2","journal-title":"Med. Care"},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2973","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-021-02849-7","volume":"30","author":"M Marks","year":"2021","unstructured":"Marks, M., Grobet, C., Audige, L.: Validity, responsiveness and minimal important change of the EQ-5D-5L in patients after rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroplasty or thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty. Qual. Life Res. 30(10), 2973\u20132982 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-021-02849-7","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"7","key":"1778_CR66","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1571","DOI":"10.1016\/j.socscimed.2004.08.034","volume":"60","author":"CA Marra","year":"2005","unstructured":"Marra, C.A., Woolcott, J.C., Kopec, J.A., et al.: A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med 60(7), 1571\u20131582 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.socscimed.2004.08.034","journal-title":"Soc Sci Med"},{"issue":"9","key":"1778_CR67","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"957","DOI":"10.1177\/1753193416659404","volume":"41","author":"C Marti","year":"2016","unstructured":"Marti, C., Hensler, S., Herren, D.B., Niedermann, K., Marks, M.: Measurement properties of the EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L to assess quality of life in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur 41(9), 957\u2013962 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1753193416659404","journal-title":"J Hand Surg Eur"},{"issue":"9","key":"1778_CR68","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1090","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2018.02.007","volume":"21","author":"NS McClure","year":"2018","unstructured":"McClure, N.S., Sayah, F.A., Ohinmaa, A., Johnson, J.A.: Minimally important difference of the EQ-5D-5L index score in adults with type 2 diabetes. Value Health 21(9), 1090\u20131097 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2018.02.007","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR69","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"644","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2016.11.015","volume":"20","author":"NS McClure","year":"2017","unstructured":"McClure, N.S., Sayah, F.A., Xie, F., Luo, N., Johnson, J.A.: Instrument-defined estimates of the minimally important difference for EQ-5D-5L index scores. Value Health. 20(4), 644\u2013650 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2016.11.015","journal-title":"Value Health."},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR70","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"270","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X10380924","volume":"31","author":"CM McDonough","year":"2011","unstructured":"McDonough, C.M., Tosteson, T.D., Tosteson, A.N., Jette, A.M., Grove, M.R., Weinstein, J.N.: A longitudinal comparison of 5 preference-weighted health state classification systems in persons with intervertebral disk herniation. Med. Decis. Mak. 31(2), 270\u2013280 (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0272989X10380924","journal-title":"Med. Decis. Mak."},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR71","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"462","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2017.09.018","volume":"21","author":"YA Michel","year":"2018","unstructured":"Michel, Y.A., Augestad, L.A., Rand, K.: Comparing 15D valuation studies in Norway and Finland-challenges when combining information from several valuation tasks. Value Health 21(4), 462\u2013470 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2017.09.018","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR72","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"837","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2022.01.092","volume":"37","author":"J Most","year":"2022","unstructured":"Most, J., Hoelen, T.A., Spekenbrink-Spooren, A., Schotanus, M.G.M., Boonen, B.: Defining clinically meaningful thresholds for patient-reported outcomes in knee arthroplasty. J. Arthroplasty 37(5), 837-844.e3 (2022). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arth.2022.01.092","journal-title":"J. Arthroplasty"},{"issue":"06","key":"1778_CR73","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1045","DOI":"10.4236\/health.2013.56140","volume":"05","author":"B Mulhern","year":"2013","unstructured":"Mulhern, B., Meadows, K.: Investigating the minimally important difference of the Diabetes Health Profile (DHP-18) and the EQ-5D and SF-6D in a UK diabetes mellitus population. Health 05(06), 1045\u20131054 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4236\/health.2013.56140","journal-title":"Health"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR74","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"549","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2021.10.010","volume":"22","author":"H Nakarai","year":"2022","unstructured":"Nakarai, H., Kato, S., Kawamura, N., et al.: Minimal clinically important difference in patients who underwent decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease. Spine J. 22(4), 549\u2013560 (2022). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.spinee.2021.10.010","journal-title":"Spine J."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR75","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"955","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-008-9369-7","volume":"17","author":"MB Nichol","year":"2008","unstructured":"Nichol, M.B., Epstein, J.D.: Separating gains and losses in health when calculating the minimum important difference for mapped utility measures. Qual. Life Res. 17(6), 955\u2013961 (2008). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-008-9369-7","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR76","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"493","DOI":"10.1136\/thoraxjnl-2015-207782","volume":"71","author":"CM Nolan","year":"2016","unstructured":"Nolan, C.M., Longworth, L., Lord, J., et al.: The EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire in COPD: validity, responsiveness and minimum important difference. Thorax 71(6), 493\u2013500 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/thoraxjnl-2015-207782","journal-title":"Thorax"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR77","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"663","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-019-06222-8","volume":"29","author":"C Parai","year":"2020","unstructured":"Parai, C., Hagg, O., Lind, B., Brisby, H.: ISSLS prize in clinical science 2020: the reliability and interpretability of score change in lumbar spine research. Eur. Spine J. 29(4), 663\u2013669 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06222-8","journal-title":"Eur. Spine J."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR78","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"39","DOI":"10.3109\/17453674.2013.867782","volume":"85","author":"A Paulsen","year":"2014","unstructured":"Paulsen, A., Roos, E.M., Pedersen, A.B., Overgaard, S.: Minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients 1 year postoperatively. Acta Orthop. 85(1), 39\u201348 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3109\/17453674.2013.867782","journal-title":"Acta Orthop."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR79","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"866","DOI":"10.1177\/2192568220967643","volume":"12","author":"CF Pedersen","year":"2022","unstructured":"Pedersen, C.F., Andersen, M.O., Carreon, L.Y., Eiskjaer, S.: Applied machine learning for spine surgeons: predicting outcome for patients undergoing treatment for lumbar disc herniation using PRO data. Glob. Spine J. 12(5), 866\u2013876 (2022). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/2192568220967643","journal-title":"Glob. Spine J."},{"key":"1778_CR80","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"70","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-5-70","volume":"5","author":"AS Pickard","year":"2007","unstructured":"Pickard, A.S., Neary, M.P., Cella, D.: Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 5, 70 (2007). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-5-70","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR81","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1427","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-013-0593-4","volume":"23","author":"LM Sagberg","year":"2014","unstructured":"Sagberg, L.M., Jakola, A.S., Solheim, O.: Quality of life assessed with EQ-5D in patients undergoing glioma surgery: what is the responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference? Qual. Life Res. 23(5), 1427\u20131434 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-013-0593-4","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR82","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"594","DOI":"10.3174\/ajnr.A4150","volume":"36","author":"L Shahgholi","year":"2015","unstructured":"Shahgholi, L., Yost, K.J., Carter, R.E., et al.: Correlation of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System with legacy outcomes measures in assessment of response to lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 36(3), 594\u2013599 (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3174\/ajnr.A4150","journal-title":"AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol."},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR83","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"722","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijrobp.2016.12.034","volume":"97","author":"T Shaikh","year":"2017","unstructured":"Shaikh, T., Li, T., Handorf, E.A., et al.: Long-term patient-reported outcomes from a phase 3 randomized prospective trial of conventional versus hypofractionated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 97(4), 722\u2013731 (2017). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijrobp.2016.12.034","journal-title":"Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys."},{"key":"1778_CR84","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"71","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-4-71","volume":"4","author":"R Shikiar","year":"2006","unstructured":"Shikiar, R., Willian, M.K., Okun, M.M., Thompson, C.S., Revicki, D.A.: The validity and responsiveness of three quality of life measures in the assessment of psoriasis patients: results of a phase II study. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 4, 71 (2006). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-4-71","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR85","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"707","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-015-1108-2","volume":"25","author":"T Shiroiwa","year":"2016","unstructured":"Shiroiwa, T., Fukuda, T., Ikeda, S., et al.: Japanese population norms for preference-based measures: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6D. Qual. Life Res. 25(3), 707\u2013719 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-015-1108-2","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR86","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"262","DOI":"10.1177\/1758573214534650","volume":"6","author":"O Skare","year":"2014","unstructured":"Skare, O., Mowinckel, P., Schroder, C.P., Liavaag, S., Reikeras, O., Brox, J.I.: Responsiveness of outcome measures in patients with superior labral anterior and posterior lesions. Shoulder Elbow. 6(4), 262\u2013272 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1758573214534650","journal-title":"Shoulder Elbow."},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR87","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"291","DOI":"10.1016\/j.psychres.2013.01.016","volume":"209","author":"SS Thwin","year":"2013","unstructured":"Thwin, S.S., Hermes, E., Lew, R., et al.: Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in quality of life in schizophrenia measured by the Quality of Well-Being Scale and disease-specific measures. Psychiatry Res. 209(3), 291\u2013296 (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.psychres.2013.01.016","journal-title":"Psychiatry Res."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR88","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"37","DOI":"10.1136\/thoraxjnl-2020-214944","volume":"76","author":"APY Tsai","year":"2021","unstructured":"Tsai, A.P.Y., Hur, S.A., Wong, A., et al.: Minimum important difference of the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS in fibrotic interstitial lung disease. Thorax 76(1), 37\u201343 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/thoraxjnl-2020-214944","journal-title":"Thorax"},{"issue":"12","key":"1778_CR89","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3009","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-016-1336-0","volume":"25","author":"K Tsiplova","year":"2016","unstructured":"Tsiplova, K., Pullenayegum, E., Cooke, T., Xie, F.: EQ-5D-derived health utilities and minimally important differences for chronic health conditions: 2011 Commonwealth Fund Survey of Sicker Adults in Canada. Qual. Life Res. 25(12), 3009\u20133016 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-016-1336-0","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR90","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"578","DOI":"10.1097\/01.brs.0000201293.57439.47","volume":"31","author":"N van der Roer","year":"2006","unstructured":"van der Roer, N., Ostelo, R.W., Bekkering, G.E., van Tulder, M.W., de Vet, H.C.: Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status, and general health status in patients with nonspecific low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(5), 578\u2013582 (2006). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/01.brs.0000201293.57439.47","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR91","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"538","DOI":"10.14444\/7071","volume":"14","author":"TA Vanhorn","year":"2020","unstructured":"Vanhorn, T.A., Knio, Z.O., O\u2019Gara, T.J.: Defining a minimum clinically important difference in patient-reported outcome measures in lumbar tubular microdecompression patients. Int. J. Spine Surg. 14(4), 538\u2013543 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.14444\/7071","journal-title":"Int. J. Spine Surg."},{"key":"1778_CR92","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-1-4","volume":"1","author":"SJ Walters","year":"2003","unstructured":"Walters, S.J., Brazier, J.E.: What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 1, 4 (2003). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1477-7525-1-4","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR93","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1523","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-004-7713-0","volume":"14","author":"SJ Walters","year":"2005","unstructured":"Walters, S.J., Brazier, J.E.: Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual. Life Res. 14(6), 1523\u20131532 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-004-7713-0","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"11","key":"1778_CR94","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e0224970","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0224970","volume":"14","author":"ELY Wong","year":"2019","unstructured":"Wong, E.L.Y., Xu, R.H., Cheung, A.W.L.: Measuring the impact of chronic conditions and associated multimorbidity on health-related quality of life in the general population in Hong Kong SAR, China: a cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE 14(11), e0224970 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0224970","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR95","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"869","DOI":"10.1007\/s10198-020-01178-9","volume":"21","author":"ELY Wong","year":"2020","unstructured":"Wong, E.L.Y., Xu, R.H., Cheung, A.W.L.: Health-related quality of life in elderly people with hypertension and the estimation of minimally important difference using EQ-5D-5L in Hong Kong SAR, China. Eur. J. Health Econ. 21(6), 869\u2013879 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10198-020-01178-9","journal-title":"Eur. J. Health Econ."},{"issue":"11","key":"1778_CR96","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e039397","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2020-039397","volume":"10","author":"RH Xu","year":"2020","unstructured":"Xu, R.H., Wong, E.L., Cheung, A.W.: Estimation of minimally important difference of the EQ-5D-5L utility scores among patients with either hypertension or diabetes or both: a cross-sectional study in Hong Kong. BMJ Open 10(11), e039397 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2020-039397","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"issue":"10","key":"1778_CR97","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1721","DOI":"10.3390\/ijerph16101721","volume":"16","author":"Q Yao","year":"2019","unstructured":"Yao, Q., Liu, C., Zhang, Y., Xu, L.: Health-related quality of life of people with self-reported hypertension: a national cross-sectional survey in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16(10), 1721 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/ijerph16101721","journal-title":"Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health"},{"key":"1778_CR98","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"35","DOI":"10.1186\/s12955-016-0438-2","volume":"14","author":"K Yoshizawa","year":"2016","unstructured":"Yoshizawa, K., Kobayashi, H., Fujie, M., Ogawa, Y., Yajima, T., Kawai, K.: Estimation of minimal clinically important change of the Japanese version of EQ-5D in patients with chronic noncancer pain: a retrospective research using real-world data. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 14, 35 (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12955-016-0438-2","journal-title":"Health Qual. Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR99","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"42","DOI":"10.1002\/ibd.20989","volume":"16","author":"RG Stark","year":"2010","unstructured":"Stark, R.G., Reitmeir, P., Leidl, R., Konig, H.H.: Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in inflammatory bowel disease in Germany. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 16(1), 42\u201351 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ibd.20989","journal-title":"Inflamm. Bowel Dis."},{"key":"1778_CR100","unstructured":"United States Food and Drug Administration: Patient-focused drug development: incorporating clinical outcome assessments into endpoints for regulatory decision-making (2023). https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/regulatory-information\/search-fda-guidance-documents\/patient-focused-drug-development-incorporating-clinical-outcome-assessments-endpoints-regulatory"},{"issue":"11","key":"1778_CR101","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1337","DOI":"10.1001\/archinte.1993.00410110045008","volume":"153","author":"DA Redelmeier","year":"1993","unstructured":"Redelmeier, D.A., Lorig, K.: Assessing the clinical importance of symptomatic improvements. An illustration in rheumatology. Arch. Intern. Med. 153(11), 1337\u20131342 (1993)","journal-title":"Arch. Intern. Med."},{"key":"1778_CR102","volume-title":"Test Equating: Methods and practices","author":"MJ Kolen","year":"2013","unstructured":"Kolen, M.J., Brennan, R.L.: Test Equating: Methods and practices. Springer Science & Business Media (2013)"},{"issue":"4","key":"1778_CR103","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"526","DOI":"10.1002\/art.22110","volume":"55","author":"F Tubach","year":"2006","unstructured":"Tubach, F., Dougados, M., Falissard, B., Baron, G., Logeart, I., Ravaud, P.: Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis Rheum. 55(4), 526\u2013530 (2006). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/art.22110","journal-title":"Arthritis Rheum."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR104","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"654","DOI":"10.1161\/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.594929","volume":"115","author":"KH Zou","year":"2007","unstructured":"Zou, K.H., O\u2019Malley, A.J., Mauri, L.: Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for evaluating diagnostic tests and predictive models. Circulation 115(5), 654\u2013657 (2007). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1161\/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.594929","journal-title":"Circulation"},{"issue":"12","key":"1778_CR105","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1388","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.03.015","volume":"68","author":"B Terluin","year":"2015","unstructured":"Terluin, B., Eekhout, I., Terwee, C.B., de Vet, H.C.: Minimal important change (MIC) based on a predictive modeling approach was more precise than MIC based on ROC analysis. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 68(12), 1388\u20131396 (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.03.015","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR106","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"582","DOI":"10.1097\/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C","volume":"41","author":"GR Norman","year":"2003","unstructured":"Norman, G.R., Sloan, J.A., Wyrwich, K.W.: Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med. Care 41(5), 582\u2013592 (2003). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C","journal-title":"Med. Care"},{"key":"1778_CR107","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203771587","volume-title":"Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences","author":"J Cohen","year":"2013","unstructured":"Cohen, J.: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Academic Press (2013)"},{"issue":"9","key":"1778_CR108","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"861","DOI":"10.1016\/s0895-4356(99)00071-2","volume":"52","author":"KW Wyrwich","year":"1999","unstructured":"Wyrwich, K.W., Tierney, W.M., Wolinsky, F.D.: Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 52(9), 861\u2013873 (1999). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/s0895-4356(99)00071-2","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR109","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"28","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.01.024","volume":"63","author":"D Turner","year":"2010","unstructured":"Turner, D., Schunemann, H.J., Griffith, L.E., et al.: The minimal detectable change cannot reliably replace the minimal important difference. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 63(1), 28\u201336 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.01.024","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR110","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"524","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.08.010","volume":"63","author":"CB Terwee","year":"2010","unstructured":"Terwee, C.B., Roorda, L.D., Dekker, J., et al.: Mind the MIC: large variation among populations and methods. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 63(5), 524\u2013534 (2010). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.08.010","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR111","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"85","DOI":"10.1007\/s40271-013-0036-x","volume":"7","author":"J Richardson","year":"2014","unstructured":"Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., Khan, M.A., Maxwell, A.: Validity and reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D multi-attribute utility instrument. Patient 7(1), 85\u201396 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s40271-013-0036-x","journal-title":"Patient"},{"issue":"9","key":"1778_CR112","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2509","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-020-02505-6","volume":"29","author":"JA Campbell","year":"2020","unstructured":"Campbell, J.A., Jelinek, G.A., Weiland, T.J., et al.: SF-6D health state utilities for lifestyle, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of a large international cohort of people with multiple sclerosis. Qual. Life Res. 29(9), 2509\u20132527 (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-020-02505-6","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR113","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"77","DOI":"10.1136\/ebmental-2020-300164","volume":"24","author":"T Devji","year":"2021","unstructured":"Devji, T., Carrasco-Labra, A., Guyatt, G.: Mind the methods of determining minimal important differences: three critical issues to consider. Evid. Based Ment. Health 24(2), 77\u201381 (2021). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/ebmental-2020-300164","journal-title":"Evid. Based Ment. Health"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR114","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/s0001-6918(99)00050-5","volume":"104","author":"CC Preston","year":"2000","unstructured":"Preston, C.C., Colman, A.M.: Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 104(1), 1\u201315 (2000). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/s0001-6918(99)00050-5","journal-title":"Acta Psychol. (Amst)"},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR115","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"81","DOI":"10.1037\/h0043158","volume":"63","author":"GA Miller","year":"1956","unstructured":"Miller, G.A.: The magical number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63(2), 81\u201397 (1956)","journal-title":"Psychol. Rev."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR116","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"157","DOI":"10.1081\/copd-200050508","volume":"2","author":"NK Leidy","year":"2005","unstructured":"Leidy, N.K., Wyrwich, K.W.: Bridging the gap: using triangulation methodology to estimate minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). COPD 2(1), 157\u2013165 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1081\/copd-200050508","journal-title":"COPD"},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR117","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"16","DOI":"10.1186\/s41687-019-0100-y","volume":"3","author":"H Staunton","year":"2019","unstructured":"Staunton, H., Willgoss, T., Nelsen, L., et al.: An overview of using qualitative techniques to explore and define estimates of clinically important change on clinical outcome assessments. J. Patient Rep. Outcomes 3(1), 16 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s41687-019-0100-y","journal-title":"J. Patient Rep. Outcomes"},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR118","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1239","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-022-03297-7","volume":"32","author":"KW Wyrwich","year":"2023","unstructured":"Wyrwich, K.W., Norman, G.R.: The challenges inherent with anchor-based approaches to the interpretation of important change in clinical outcome assessments. Qual. Life Res. 32(5), 1239\u20131246 (2023). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11136-022-03297-7","journal-title":"Qual. Life Res."},{"issue":"2","key":"1778_CR119","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012","volume":"61","author":"D Revicki","year":"2008","unstructured":"Revicki, D., Hays, R.D., Cella, D., Sloan, J.: Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 61(2), 102\u2013109 (2008). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR120","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"541","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2007.01.008","volume":"7","author":"AG Copay","year":"2007","unstructured":"Copay, A.G., Subach, B.R., Glassman, S.D., Polly, D.W., Jr., Schuler, T.C.: Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 7(5), 541\u2013546 (2007). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.spinee.2007.01.008","journal-title":"Spine J."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR121","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"25","DOI":"10.4097\/kja.21209","volume":"75","author":"FS Nahm","year":"2022","unstructured":"Nahm, F.S.: Receiver operating characteristic curve: overview and practical use for clinicians. Korean J. Anesthesiol. 75(1), 25\u201336 (2022). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4097\/kja.21209","journal-title":"Korean J. Anesthesiol."},{"issue":"5","key":"1778_CR122","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"395","DOI":"10.1016\/s0895-4356(03)00044-1","volume":"56","author":"RD Crosby","year":"2003","unstructured":"Crosby, R.D., Kolotkin, R.L., Williams, G.R.: Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 56(5), 395\u2013407 (2003). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/s0895-4356(03)00044-1","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"issue":"3","key":"1778_CR123","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"160","DOI":"10.1179\/2042618612Y.0000000001","volume":"20","author":"A Wright","year":"2012","unstructured":"Wright, A., Hannon, J., Hegedus, E.J., Kavchak, A.E.: Clinimetrics corner: a closer look at the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). J. Man. Manip. Ther. 20(3), 160\u2013166 (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1179\/2042618612Y.0000000001","journal-title":"J. Man. Manip. Ther."},{"issue":"6","key":"1778_CR124","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"850","DOI":"10.1111\/ene.13941","volume":"26","author":"THP Draak","year":"2019","unstructured":"Draak, T.H.P., de Greef, B.T.A., Faber, C.G., Merkies, I.S.J., on behalf of the PeriNomS Study Group: The minimum clinically important difference: which direction to take. Eur. J. Neurol. 26(6), 850\u2013855 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/ene.13941","journal-title":"Eur. J. Neurol."},{"issue":"1","key":"1778_CR125","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"63","DOI":"10.1081\/copd-200050663","volume":"2","author":"RD Hays","year":"2005","unstructured":"Hays, R.D., Farivar, S.S., Liu, H.: Approaches and recommendations for estimating minimally important differences for health-related quality of life measures. COPD 2(1), 63\u201367 (2005). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1081\/copd-200050663","journal-title":"COPD"}],"container-title":["The European Journal of Health Economics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,29]],"date-time":"2025-10-29T04:53:56Z","timestamp":1761713636000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]]},"references-count":125,"journal-issue":{"issue":"8","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,11]]}},"alternative-id":["1778"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10198-025-01778-3","relation":{},"ISSN":["1618-7598","1618-7601"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1618-7598","type":"print"},{"value":"1618-7601","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,16]]},"assertion":[{"value":"19 August 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"24 March 2025","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"16 April 2025","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"All other authors report no conflict of interest.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"No participants were involved in this study.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent to participate"}},{"value":"The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Role of the funder"}},{"value":"The PRISMA checklist was adhered to by this study to ensure adequate reporting.","order":5,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Standards of reporting"}}]}}