Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.4K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.4K
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

552
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
552
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation01:16

Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation

327
The statistical interpretation of bioequivalence data is a significant aspect of pharmaceutical research. Bioequivalence refers to the absence of any significant difference in the rate and extent to which the active ingredient in pharmaceutical products becomes available at the site of drug action when administered at the same molar dose under similar conditions. This helps determine if different drug products have similar absorption rates, ensuring their interchangeability.Statistical...
327
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

388
Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
388
Blind Procedures02:07

Blind Procedures

13.9K
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
13.9K
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs01:20

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

368
Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to subjects...
368

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Adults' health-related values and preferences related to reducing or modifying dietary fat intake: a mixed methods systematic review.

Public health nutrition·2026
Same author

Improving communication about dietary fats: development and validation of the Fats-Related Attitude Scale based on data from Brazil, China, Croatia, Poland, and Spain.

Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.)·2026
Same author

Effect of home visiting support on maternal psychosocial needs and postnatal depression: emulating a target trial.

BMJ mental health·2026
Same author

Living evidence-informed guideline on the early detection of oral squamous cell carcinoma and potentially malignant disorders: Light-based adjuncts to determine the need for biopsy, Version 2026 1.0.

Journal of the American Dental Association (1939)·2026
Same author

Light-based adjuncts to determine the need for biopsy for early detection of oral squamous cell carcinoma and potentially malignant disorders: An evidence summary of a living systematic review, Version 2026 1.0.

Journal of the American Dental Association (1939)·2026
Same author

Assessing the trustworthiness of health guidelines recommendations: the transparent, rigorous, useable, standardized, and trustworthy guide (TRUSTGUIDES) tools development.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 1, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

1.3K

Minimally important difference estimates and methods: a protocol.

Bradley C Johnston1, Shanil Ebrahim2, Alonso Carrasco-Labra3

  • 1Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Research Institute, The Hospital For Sick Children, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

BMJ Open
|October 3, 2015
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study systematically reviews anchor-based minimally important differences (MIDs) for patient-reported outcomes (PROs). It aims to create a compendium of MIDs and a tool to assess their credibility, enhancing systematic reviews and guidelines.

Keywords:
MIDMinimally Important DifferencePatient Reported OutcomeProtocolSystematic Survey

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

15.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 1, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

1.3K
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

15.5K

Area of Science:

  • Health Outcomes Research
  • Psychometrics
  • Clinical Epidemiology

Background:

  • Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are crucial for assessing treatment effects from the patient's perspective.
  • The minimally important difference (MID) quantifies the smallest change in a PRO that patients perceive as meaningful.
  • Currently, no comprehensive database or standardized method exists for appraising anchor-based MIDs.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically collect and characterize published anchor-based MIDs for PRO instruments.
  • To develop and validate a tool for assessing the credibility of MID estimates.
  • To create a compendium of MIDs to improve the interpretation of findings in systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO (1989-present).
  • Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts for relevant studies.
  • Data extraction and synthesis of methods for MID estimation and empirical MID values; development and validation of a credibility assessment instrument.

Main Results:

  • A systematic survey of the literature will identify published anchor-based MIDs.
  • A novel instrument will be developed to evaluate the credibility of MID estimates.
  • The reliability of the credibility instrument will be assessed through inter-rater reliability testing.

Conclusions:

  • This research will provide a comprehensive resource of anchor-based MIDs for PROs.
  • The developed credibility instrument will standardize the appraisal of MID estimates.
  • Findings will enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of PRO data in evidence-based medicine.