↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Minimally important differences for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference for individuals with back pain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
127 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Minimally important differences for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference for individuals with back pain
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s93391
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dagmar Amtmann, Jiseon Kim, Hyewon Chung, Robert L Askew, Ryoungsun Park, Karon F Cook

Abstract

The minimally important difference (MID) refers to the smallest change that is sufficiently meaningful to carry implications for patients' care. MIDs are necessary to guide the interpretation of scores. This study estimated MID for the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference (PI). Study instruments were administered to 414 people who participated in two studies that included treatment with low back pain (LBP; n=218) or depression (n=196). Participants with LBP received epidural steroid injections and participants with depression received antidepressants, psychotherapy, or both. MIDs were estimated for the changes in LBP. MIDs were included only if a priori criteria were met (ie, sample size ≥10, Spearman correlation ≥0.3 between anchor measures and PROMIS-PI scores, and effect size range =0.2-0.8). The interquartile range (IQR) of MID estimates was calculated. The IQR ranged from 3.5 to 5.5 points. The lower bound estimate of the IQR (3.5) was greater than mean of standard error of measurement (SEM) both at time 1 (SEM =2.3) and at time 2 (SEM =2.5), indicating that the estimate of MID exceeded measurement error. Based on our results, researchers and clinicians using PROMIS-PI can assume that change of 3.5 to 5.5 points in comparisons of mean PROMIS-PI scores of people with LBP can be considered meaningful.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 79 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Other 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Professor 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 49%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 24 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2020.
All research outputs
#3,129,922
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#354
of 1,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,886
of 300,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.