Responsiveness and minimal important change of the Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16)

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Table 5 Triangulating MIC values from anchor-based and distribution methods

Methods		MIC
Methods		improvement	deterioration	Overall
Anchor-based	ROC curve analysis (95%CI)^a	6.5 (1, 8)	1.5 (−2, 4)	4.0
	Predictive modelling LR MIC_pred (95%CI)^b	2.5 (−3.6, 6.2)	0.78 (−5.7, 5)
	Predictive modelling LR^b MIC_{pred (Adjusted)} (95%CI)^c	3.9 (−0.1, 9.5)	2.3 (−2.7, 7.6)	3.1
Distribution-based	0.33 SD			2.17 = 2.2
	1 SEM¹ = SD_b *\(\sqrt {1 - {\text{Reliability}}}\)			2.16 = 2.2
	1.96 SEM			4.23 = 4.2
Mean MIC				3.76 = 3.8

“bold values” are included in the MIC analysis
¹ Cronbach’s Alpha for FROM-16 score was 0.89; MIC Minimal Important Change; SD_b Standard Deviation of the FROM-16 score at the baseline; SEM Standard Error of Measurement
^abased on 1000 bootstrap simulation; ^bAdjusted for the proportions improved and deteriorated; ^cCI based on Turluin et al.’s [34] Excel sheet (Figs. S1–S4)