Evaluation of the “Minimal Clinically Important Difference” (MCID) of the KOOS, KSS and SF‐12 scores after open‐wedge high tibial osteotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Defining a Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) value for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) is crucial for determining the effectiveness of a procedure and calculating the sample size for trial planning. The purpose of this study was to determine the MCID of several PROMs (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Society Score (KSS) and the SF-12) in patients who underwent medial opening-wedge High-Tibial Osteotomy (owHTO) with Patient-Specific Cutting Guides (PSCGs), using anchor-based methods. METHODS: Patients undergoing isolated medial owHTO with PSCGs between January 2013 and January 2017 were enrolled in this single-center, prospective, observational study. Three outcome scores were collected pre-operatively and at the 2 years follow-up evaluation: KOOS, KSS and SF-12. The MCIDs were calculated using anchor-based method: at 2 years postoperatively: "Compared with before surgery, how would you rate operated joint now?" The responses were recorded using a five-point scale. Patients who answered "about the same" or "somewhat worse" were classified into the no change group, while those who answered "somewhat better" were classified into the minimal change group. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to define the cutoff point that best discriminated between the minimal change and no change groups for each PROMs RESULTS: 196 patients were included, 75 (somewhat better) and 24 patients (about the same and somewhat worse) were, respectively, assigned to the "no change" and "minimal change" groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics and postoperative complications. At 24 months follow-up all the PROMs (KOOS, KSS and SF-12) were significantly better for the "minimal change" group compared to the "no change" group. MCID was 15.4 for KOOS pain, 15.1 for KOOS symptoms, 17 for KOOS ADL, 11.2 for KOOS sports/recreation, 16.5 for KOOS QQL, 3 for KSS symptoms, 5.6 for KSS activity, 7.2 for SF-12 physical component and 6.3 for PCS mental component. CONCLUSION: This study determined the MCIDs of common used PROMs in patients undergoing owHTO. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective Cohort Study, Level II.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".