Minimal Clinically Important Difference in the Physical, Emotional, and Total Symptom Distress Scores of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System  David Hui, MD, MSc, Omar Shamieh, MD, MBA, Carlos Eduardo Paiva, MD, PhD, Odai Khamash, MD, Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz, MD, Jung Hye Kwon, MD, PhD, Mary Ann Muckaden, MD, Minjeong Park, MS, Joseph Arthur, MD, Eduardo Bruera, MD  Journal of Pain and Symptom Management  Volume 51, Issue 2, Pages 262-269 (February 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.10.004 Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Terms and Conditions

Fig. 1 Average Edmonton Symptom Assessment System symptom change by PGI categories. a) physical symptoms, b) emotional symptoms, and c) total symptom burden. PGI was strongly associated with individual symptom change in all instances (ANOVA P < 0.001). ANOVA = analysis of variance; ESAS = Edmonton Symptom Assessment System; PGI = Patient's Global Impression Scale. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2016 51, 262-269DOI: (10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.10.004) Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Terms and Conditions

Fig. 2 Receiver operating characteristic curves for a) improvement and b) deterioration for the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System physical, emotional, and total symptom distress scores. The area under the curve ranged between 0.69 and 0.76, suggesting moderate discrimination. AUC = area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2016 51, 262-269DOI: (10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.10.004) Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Terms and Conditions