An assessment of the minimal clinically important difference for the pain disability quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Spine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The Pain Disability Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire-Spine (PDQQ-S) is a validated six question patient reported outcome measure designed for usage in minimally invasive spine intervention. The purpose of this study was to determine the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the PDQQ-S. Design: Retrospective single arm cohort study involving 411 patients who had undergone lumbar facet and/or sacroiliac joint RFN and had completed pre-and 3-month post RFN PDQQ-S. Methods: The MCID using both distribution and anchor-based ("Rebook RFN"; "Analgesic Requirements") methods were calculated. Results: The distribution-based approach (using standard error of measurement) estimated the MCID to be -17.3 [PDQQ-S baseline mean (SD): 46.9 (7.9)]. This is supported by the anchor based approach, which calculated the MCID to be: -21.5 for rebook RFN; -11.3, -17.2 and -30.5 for mildly, moderately and dramatically decreased NSAID use respectively; and -11.7, -16.9 and -31.7 for mildly, moderately and dramatically decreased opioid use respectively. A moderate reduction in medication use was deemed to be clinically relevant. Conclusion: The MCID value for the PDQQ-S is a score reduction of 17.
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 | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".