The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Minimal clinically important difference for change in 6‐minute walk test distance of adults with pathology: a systematic review
Abstract
Rationale, aims, and objectives: The 6‐minute walk test (6MWT) is widely used as a test of functional exercise capacity. Several studies have reported the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the 6MWT; however, the findings of the studies have not been examined in the context of one another. In this review, we aimed to summarize available information on the MCID for the 6MWT performed by patients with pathology. Methods: Relevant literature was identified by searches of 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health), examination of article reference lists, and consultation with an expert. Inclusion necessitated that articles (1) be original, full length, and peer reviewed, (2) report an MCID for the 6MWT, and (3) focus on adults with medical issues. Articles were excluded if the MCID was determined by a procedure other than receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Articles were abstracted for information on participants, interventions, 6MWT distance, and the determination of MCID. Quality was assessed using a hybrid 9‐item (0‐ to 18‐point) instrument. Results: Six articles were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The populations studied included people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, coronary artery disease, diffuse parenchymal lung disease, and non–cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis and adults with fear of falling. Mean baseline 6MWT distances ranged from 295 to 551 m. The MCIDs for which the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was at least 0.70 ranged from 14.0 to 30.5 m. Conclusions: Based on our findings, a change of 14.0 to 30.5 m may be clinically important across multiple patient groups.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A change of 14.0 to 30.5 meters is clinically important for 6MWT [35];”
From Pilot study of a telehealth perioperative physical activity intervention for older adults with cancer and their caregivers (2020) · cites this paper as [35]
Citations
Cites
ATS Statement: Guidelines for the Six-Minute Walk Test
(2002) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102 · Cited by 11,195
Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 · Cited by 10,764
Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults.
Perera, S., Mody, S. H., Woodman, R. C., & Studenski, S. A. (2006) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00701.x · Cited by 2,513
Interpretation of quality of life changes
LYDICK, E. G., & Epstein, R. S. (1993) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/bf00435226 · Cited by 531
Holland, A. E., Hill, C. J., Rasekaba, T., Lee, A., Naughton, M. T., & McDonald, C. F. (2010) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2009.10.017 · Cited by 487
du Bois, R. M., Weycker, D. A., Albera, C., Bradford, W. Z., Costabel, U., Kartashov, A. I., LANCASTER, L. H., Noble, P. W., Sahn, S. A., Szwarcberg, J., et al. (2010) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201007-1179oc · Cited by 462
Bohannon, R. W., & Glenney, S. S. (2014) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.12158 · Cited by 431
Self-citationThe minimal detectable change cannot reliably replace the minimal important difference
Turner, D., Schünemann, H. J., Griffith, L. E., Beaton, D., Griffiths, A. M., Critch, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.01.024 · Cited by 368
Wise, R. A., & Brown, C. D. (2005) · COPD Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease · doi:10.1081/copd-200050527 · Cited by 320
Grémeaux, V., Troisgros, O., Benaïm, S., Hannequin, A., Laurent, Y., Casillas, J.-M., & Benaïm, C. (2011) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2010.11.023 · Cited by 235
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lamb, S. E., Sheehan, B., Atherton, N., Nichols, V., Collins, H., Mistry, D., Dosanjh, S., Slowther, A. M., Khan, I., Petrou, S., et al. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k1675 · Cited by 417
Impact of Exercise Rehabilitation on Exercise Capacity and Quality-of-Life in Heart Failure
Taylor, R. S., Walker, S., Smart, N. A., Piepoli, M. F., Warren, F. C., Ciani, O., Whellan, D. J., O’Connor, C. M., Keteyian, S. J., Coats, A. J. S., et al. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.12.072 · Cited by 288
“Also, there was an increase of $16 m in the 6MWT in the ExCR group, which may also be clinically significant (48).”
BackgroundNopp, S., Moik, F., Klok, F. A., Gattinger, D., Petrovic, M., Vonbank, K., Koczulla, A. R., Ay, C., & Zwick, R. H. (2022) · Respiration · doi:10.1159/000522118 · Cited by 303
Singh, A., D’Amico, D., Andreux, P. A., Fouassier, A. M., Blanco-Bose, W., Evans, M., Aebischer, P., Auwerx, J., & Rinsch, C. (2022) · Cell Reports Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2022.100633 · Cited by 256
“It is particularly noteworthy that the group administered the high dose of UA (1,000 mg) increased their walking distance by >30 m during the 6MWT, as this reflects a clinically meaningful difference in mobility.(32) The fact that UA treatment improved the outcomes related to physical performance in the absence of any…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBohannon, R. W., & Crouch, R. H. (2018) · Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention · doi:10.1097/hcr.0000000000000336 · Cited by 268
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bohannon, R. W., & Crouch, R.
- Affiliations
- Campbell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Crouch, Rebecca
- ORCID
- Bohannon, Richard W.
- Venue
- Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-09-04
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 377-381
- ISSN
- 1356-1294 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2753
- OpenAlex
- W2517085950
- Cited by
- 715
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 80 · 2025: 118 · 2024: 88 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 12
- FWCI
- 6.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ministerul Cercetării, Inovării şi Digitalizării
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Keywords
- minimal clinically important difference, 6-minute walk test, exercise capacity, functional capacity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, coronary artery disease, interstitial lung disease, non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis, fear of falling, ROC curve
- MeSH terms
- Accidental Falls, Walk Test, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Bronchiectasis, Coronary Artery Disease, Fear, Humans, Quality of Life, ROC Curve, Lung Diseases, Interstitial, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
