The Spine Journal
Volume 10, Issue 4 , Pages 283-284, April 2010

The rise and fall of the “minimum clinically important difference”

  • Eugene J. Carragee, MD (Editor-in-Chief)

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Stanford Medicine Outpatient Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 450 Broadway St, Pavilion C-MC 6342, Redwood City, CA 94063, USA. Tel.: (650) 723-7797; fax: (650) 723-9805.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Stanford Medicine Outpatient Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 450 Broadway St, Pavilion C – MC 6342, Redwood City, CA 94063, USA

Received 4 February 2010; accepted 6 February 2010.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.

 FDA device/drug status: not applicable.

 Author disclosures: EJC (stock ownership, including options and warrants, Simpirica, Bioassetts, Cytonics; private investments, including venture capital, start-ups, Simpirica; consulting, Medtronic, Synthes, Well-Point B/C B/S; trips/travel, US army; scientific advisory board, Intrinsic Orthopedics, Cytonics; other office, Bioassetts; grants, AO Foundation; fellowship support, DePuy Spine; other relationships, Orthopaedic Surgeon).

PII: S1529-9430(10)00117-8

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.013

The Spine Journal
Volume 10, Issue 4 , Pages 283-284, April 2010

Article Tools