{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,11,13]],"date-time":"2026-11-13T12:59:45Z","timestamp":1794574785271,"version":"4.9.1"},"reference-count":31,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,11,5]],"date-time":"2018-11-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1541376000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/journals\/pages\/open_access\/funder_policies\/chorus\/standard_publication_model"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Neurosurg.","NEUROS"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2019,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>BACKGROUND<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The diagnosis of vestibular schwannomas (VS) is associated with reduced patient quality of life (QOL). Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was introduced as the lowest improvement in a patient-reported outcome (PRO) score discerned as significant by the patient. We formerly presented an MCID for the Penn Acoustic Neuroma QOL (PANQOL) battery based on cross-sectional data from 2 tertiary referral centers.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>OBJECTIVE<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To validate the PANQOL MCID values using prospective data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>METHODS<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A prospective registry capturing QOL was queried, comprising patients treated at the authors\u2019 institution and Acoustic Neuroma Association members. Anchor- and distribution-based techniques were utilized to determine the MCID for domain and total scores. We only included anchors with Spearman's correlation coefficient larger than 0.3 in the MCID threshold calculations. Most domains had multiple anchors with which to estimate the MCID.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>RESULTS<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A total of 1254 patients (mean age: 57.4 yr, 65% females) were analyzed. Anchor-based methods produced a span of MCID values (median, 25th-75th percentile) for each PANQOL domain and the total score: hearing (13.1, 13-16 points), balance (14, 14-19 points), pain (21, 20-28 points), face (25, 16-36 points), energy (16, 15-18 points), anxiety (16 [1 estimate]), general (13 [1 estimate]), and total (12.5, 10-15 points).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>CONCLUSION<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Current findings corroborate our formerly shared experience using multi-institutional, cross-sectional information. These MCID thresholds can serve as a pertinent outcome when deciphering the clinical magnitude of VS QOL endpoints in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1093\/neuros\/nyy467","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2018,8,31]],"date-time":"2018-08-31T23:56:14Z","timestamp":1535759774000},"page":"779-785","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":27,"title":["Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Patients With Vestibular Schwannoma: Are all Quality-of-Life Scores Significant?"],"prefix":"10.1227","volume":"85","author":[{"given":"Panagiotis","family":"Kerezoudis","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Kathleen J","family":"Yost","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Nicole M","family":"Tombers","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Otolaryngology\u2013Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Maria Peris","family":"Celda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Matthew L","family":"Carlson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"},{"name":"Department of Otolaryngology\u2013Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Michael J","family":"Link","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"},{"name":"Department of Otolaryngology\u2013Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"276","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2019,12]]},"reference":[{"issue":"suppl_5","key":"bib1-20231011","first-page":"S64","article-title":"CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2010\u20132014","volume":"19","author":"Ostrom","year":"2017","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib2-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"202","DOI":"10.1177\/0194599815585508","article-title":"The minimal clinically important difference in vestibular schwannoma quality-of-life assessment: an important step beyond P < .05","volume":"153","author":"Carlson","year":"2015","journal-title":"Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"bib3-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3171\/2015.9.FOCUS15376","article-title":"Neurosurgery value and quality in the context of the Affordable Care Act: a policy perspective","volume":"39","author":"Menger","year":"2015","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"issue":"12","key":"bib4-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1573","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jocn.2011.05.009","article-title":"Systematic review of quality of life in the management of vestibular schwannoma","volume":"18","author":"Gauden","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Clin Neurosci"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib5-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"69","DOI":"10.1159\/000285182","article-title":"Quality of life in sporadic vestibular schwannoma: a review","volume":"72","author":"Gouveris","year":"2010","journal-title":"ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib6-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"211","DOI":"10.3171\/jns.2001.94.2.0211","article-title":"Patient-assessed outcomes after excision of acoustic neuroma: postoperative symptoms and quality of life","volume":"94","author":"Martin","year":"2001","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib7-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"205","DOI":"10.3171\/jns.2006.105.2.205","article-title":"Surgery for large vestibular schwannomas: how patients and surgeons perceive quality of life","volume":"105","author":"Nicoucar","year":"2006","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"issue":"8","key":"bib8-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1646","DOI":"10.1002\/lary.20988","article-title":"Validation of a disease-specific quality-of-life instrument for acoustic neuroma: the Penn Acoustic Neuroma quality-of-life scale","volume":"120","author":"Shaffer","year":"2010","journal-title":"Laryngoscope"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib9-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"176","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2005.07.011","article-title":"Distribution-based and anchor-based approaches provided different interpretability estimates for the hydrocephalus outcome questionnaire","volume":"59","author":"Kulkarni","year":"2006","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"1","key":"bib10-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.1081\/BIP-120028507","article-title":"Issues for statisticians in conducting analyses and translating results for quality of life end points in clinical trials","volume":"14","author":"Sloan","year":"2004","journal-title":"J Biopharm Stat"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib11-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012","article-title":"Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes","volume":"61","author":"Revicki","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"4","key":"bib12-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"407","DOI":"10.1016\/0197-2456(89)90005-6","article-title":"Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference","volume":"10","author":"Jaeschke","year":"1989","journal-title":"Control Clin Trials"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib13-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"202","DOI":"10.1177\/0194599815585508","article-title":"The minimal clinically important difference in vestibular schwannoma quality-of-life assessment: an important step beyond P < .05","volume":"153","author":"Carlson","year":"2015","journal-title":"Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"bib14-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3171\/2018.8.FOCUS18441","article-title":"Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the quality outcomes database","volume":"44","author":"Asher","year":"2018","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib15-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"146","DOI":"10.1177\/019459988509300202","article-title":"Facial nerve grading system","volume":"93","author":"House","year":"1985","journal-title":"Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"bib16-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"473","DOI":"10.1097\/00005650-199206000-00002","article-title":"The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection","volume":"30","author":"Ware","year":"1992","journal-title":"Med Care"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib17-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012","article-title":"Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes","volume":"61","author":"Revicki","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"12","key":"bib18-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1241","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2005.07.008","article-title":"Minimally important differences were estimated for the functional assessment of cancer therapy-colorectal (FACT-C) instrument using a combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches","volume":"58","author":"Yost","year":"2005","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"5","key":"bib19-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"507","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2010.11.018","article-title":"Minimally important differences were estimated for six patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients","volume":"64","author":"Yost","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib20-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"172","DOI":"10.1177\/0163278705275340","article-title":"Combining distribution- and anchor-based approaches to determine minimally important differences: the FACIT experience","volume":"28","author":"Yost","year":"2005","journal-title":"Eval Health Prof"},{"issue":"1","key":"bib21-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jpainsymman.2007.02.040","article-title":"Use of a single-item screening tool to detect clinically significant fatigue, pain, distress, and anorexia in ambulatory cancer practice","volume":"35","author":"Butt","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Pain Symptom Manage"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib22-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1016\/S0304-3959(01)00349-9","article-title":"Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale","volume":"94","author":"Farrar","year":"2001","journal-title":"Pain"},{"issue":"5","key":"bib23-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"582","DOI":"10.1097\/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C","article-title":"Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation","volume":"41","author":"Norman","year":"2003","journal-title":"Med Care"},{"key":"bib24-20231011","year":"2000"},{"issue":"4","key":"bib25-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"371","DOI":"10.4065\/77.4.371","article-title":"Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures","volume":"77","author":"Guyatt","year":"2002","journal-title":"Mayo Clin Proc"},{"issue":"4","key":"bib26-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"833","DOI":"10.3171\/2014.11.JNS14594","article-title":"Long-term quality of life in patients with vestibular schwannoma: an international multicenter cross-sectional study comparing microsurgery, stereotactic radiosurgery, observation, and nontumor controls","volume":"122","author":"Carlson","year":"2015","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"issue":"4","key":"bib27-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"855","DOI":"10.3171\/2008.10.JNS081014","article-title":"Prospective comparison of quality of life before and after observation, radiation, or surgery for vestibular schwannomas","volume":"111","author":"Di Maio","year":"2009","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"issue":"1","key":"bib28-20231011","first-page":"77","article-title":"Patient outcomes after vestibular schwannoma management: a prospective comparison of microsurgical resection and stereotactic radiosurgery","volume":"59","author":"Pollock","year":"2006","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"2","key":"bib29-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"172","DOI":"10.1177\/0163278705275340","article-title":"Combining distribution- and anchor-based approaches to determine minimally important differences: the FACIT experience","volume":"28","author":"Yost","year":"2005","journal-title":"Eval Health Prof"},{"issue":"8","key":"bib30-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"889","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2013.02.015","article-title":"Validation of a consensus-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold using an objective functional external anchor","volume":"13","author":"Gatchel","year":"2013","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"issue":"Suppl 1","key":"bib31-20231011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S64","DOI":"10.1227\/01.neu.0000462079.96571.dc","article-title":"Determination of the minimum improvement in pain, disability, and health state associated with cost-effectiveness: introduction of the concept of minimum cost-effective difference","volume":"76","author":"Parker","year":"2015","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"}],"container-title":["Neurosurgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/neurosurgery\/article-pdf\/85\/6\/779\/30659801\/nyy467.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.1093\/neuros\/nyy467","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,7]],"date-time":"2026-08-07T16:50:47Z","timestamp":1786121447000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.1093\/neuros\/nyy467"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,11,5]]},"references-count":31,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2019]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/neuros\/nyy467","relation":{},"ISSN":["0148-396X","1524-4040"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0148-396X","type":"print"},{"value":"1524-4040","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,11,5]]}}}