Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Robust Clinically Important Difference (RCID) of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 (MPAI-4) as measures of response to intervention. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of existing data. Both distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to triangulate on the MCID and to identify a moderate, that is, more robust, level of change (RCID) for the MPAI-4. These were further evaluated with respect to clinical provider ratings. PARTICIPANTS: Data for individuals with acquired brain injury in rehabilitation programs throughout the United States in the OutcomeInfo Database (n = 3087) with 2 MPAI-4 ratings. MAIN MEASURES: MPAI-4, Supervision Rating Scale, Clinician Rating of Global Clinical Improvement. RESULTS: Initial analyses suggested 5 T-score points (5T) as the MCID and 9T as the RCID. Eighty-one percent to 87% of clinical raters considered a 5T change and 99% considered a 9T change to indicate meaningful improvement. CONCLUSIONS: 5T represents the MCID for the MPAI-4 and 9T, the RCID. Both values are notably less than the Reliable Change Index (RCI). While the RCI indicates change with a high level of statistical confidence, it may be insensitive to change that is considered meaningful by providers and participants as indicated by the MCID.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Malec et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: