So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Floor and Ceiling Effect× | Anchor-Based Minimal Important Difference× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực | Trắc lượng tâm lý | Trắc lượng tâm lý |
| Họ | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Năm ra đời≠ | 2000 | 1989 |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Classical psychometrics | Guyatt, Jaeschke, and Singer |
| Loại≠ | Measurement validity assessment | Minimal clinically important difference estimation |
| Công trình gốc≠ | McHorney, C. A. (2000). Ten recommendations for measuring health status. Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes, 2(1), 1-5. link ↗ | Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989). Measurement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials, 10(4), 407-415. DOI ↗ |
| Tên gọi khác | Floor effect, Ceiling effect, Psychometric floor effect, Measurement floor | MCID, Minimal clinically important difference, Anchor-based MCID, Minimal important change |
| Liên quan | 4 | 4 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | Floor and ceiling effects are psychometric phenomena in which a disproportionately large proportion of respondents achieve the lowest (floor) or highest (ceiling) possible score on a measurement scale. These effects compromise scale reliability and responsiveness, limiting the instrument's ability to distinguish among respondents and detect meaningful change over time. Systematic assessment of floor and ceiling effects is essential for evaluating the psychometric adequacy of health-related quality-of-life scales, functional status measures, and other patient-reported outcomes. | The anchor-based method for establishing Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) is a technique for determining the smallest change in a patient-reported outcome (PRO) that patients or clinicians perceive as meaningful or important. Pioneered by Guyatt, Jaeschke, and Singer in 1989, this approach anchors changes in outcome scores to external clinically meaningful events or judgments, enabling researchers and clinicians to interpret whether treatment effects represent real, patient-relevant improvements. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|