Index to Chiropractic Literature
Index to Chiropractic Literature
My ICL     Sign In
Sunday, September 20, 2020
Index to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic Literature

ICL Home

For best results switch to Advanced Search.
Article Detail
Return to Search Results
ID 16503
  Title Assessing the clinical significance of change scores recorded on subjective outcome measures
Journal J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004 Jan;27(1):26-35
Peer Review Yes
Publication Type Article
Abstract/Notes BACKGROUND: To date, clinical trials have relied almost exclusively on the statistical significance of changes in scores from outcome measures in interpreting the effectiveness of treatment interventions. It is becoming increasingly important, however, to determine the clinical rather than statistical significance of these change scores.

OBJECTIVE: To determine cutoff values for change scores that distinguish patients who have clinically improved from those who have not.

METHOD: Data were obtained from 165 back and 100 neck patients undergoing chiropractic treatment. Patients completed the Bournemouth Questionnaire (BQ) before treatment and the BQ and Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale after treatment. Three statistical methods were applied to individual change scores on the BQ. These were (1) the Reliable Change Index (RCI); (2) the effect size (ES); and (3) the raw and percentage change scores. The PGIC scale was used as the "gold standard" of clinically significant change.

RESULTS: The RCI, using the cutoff value of >1.96, appropriately identified clinical improvement in back patients but not in neck patients. An individual ES of approximately 0.5 had the highest sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing back and neck patients who had undergone clinically significant improvement from those who had not. In terms of raw score changes, percentage BQ change scores [(raw change score/baseline score) x 100] of 47% and 34% were identified as having the highest sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing clinically significant improvement from nonimprovement in back and neck patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION: This study provides a methodological framework for identifying clinically significant change in patients. This approach has important implications in providing clinically relevant information about the effect of a treatment intervention in an individual patient.

Click on the above link for the PubMed record for this article; full text by subscription. This abstract is reproduced here with the permission of the publisher.

   Text (Citation) Tagged (Export) Excel
Email To
HTML Text     Excel

To use this feature you must register a personal account in My ICL. Registration is free! In My ICL you can save your ICL searches in My Searches, and you can save search results in My Collections. Be sure to use the Held Citations feature to collect citations from an entire search session. Read more search tips.

Sign Into Existing My ICL Account    |    Register A New My ICL Account
Search Tips
  • Enclose phrases in "quotation marks".  Examples: "low back pain", "evidence-based"
  • Retrieve all forms of a word with an asterisk*, also called a wildcard or truncation.  Example: chiropract* retrieves chiropractic, chiropractor, chiropractors
  • Register an account in My ICL to save search histories (My Searches) and collections of records (My Collections)
Advanced Search Tips