The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: Conceptualization and development
Open accessAbstract
The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale is a new measure of functional disability for patients with back pain. Functional disability was operationalized in terms of perceived difficulty associated with simple physical activities. The content of the scale was developed in several stages, including a literature review, two studies seeking the opinions of patients and experts, pilot testing, and a large, longitudinal study of back pain patients. Forty-eight disability items were extensively studied using standard methods such as test-retest reliability, item-total correlations, and factor analysis, as well as modern techniques based on item response theory. Items that were highly effective in discriminating between different levels of disability were selected for the final, reduced scale. The scale has 20 items, representing six empirically derived categories of activities affected by back pain. Measurement properties of this instrument have been previously discussed.
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
“The QBPDS has strong psychometric properties.”
From Exposure and CBT for chronic back pain: An RCT on differential efficacy and optimal length of treatment (2018) · cites this paper as Kopec et al., 1996
Citations
Cites
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection
Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 · Cited by 30,033
Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use
Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (1989) · Cited by 9,595
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A. (1969) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162101 · Cited by 8,012
Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests
Psychology, M. (1961) · Information and Control · doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(61)80061-2 · Cited by 6,936
MCHORNEY, C. A., JOHNE, W., & ANASTASIAE, R. (1993) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199303000-00006 · Cited by 6,681
Applications of Item Response Theory To Practical Testing Problems
Lord, F. M. (2012) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203056615 · Cited by 5,009
Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6 · Cited by 4,982
The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and Final Revision of a Health Status Measure
Bergner, M., Bobbitt, R. A., Carter, W. B., & Gilson, B. S. (1981) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198108000-00001 · Cited by 4,619
Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis
Fries, J. F., Spitz, P. W., Kraines, R. G., & Holman, H. R. (1980) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.1780230202 · Cited by 4,404
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Millard, 1989, The functional assessment screening questionnaire: application for evaluating pain-related disability, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 70, 303
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fairbank, J. C. T., & Pynsent, P. B. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017 · Cited by 5,851
The Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire
Roland, M. O., & Fairbank, J. C. T. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00006 · Cited by 1,913
(2011) · Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository · Cited by 1,209
Fritz, J. M., & Irrgang, J. J. (2001) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/81.2.776 · Cited by 1,060
Pain Catastrophizing and Kinesiophobia: Predictors of Chronic Low Back Pain
Picavet, H. S. J. (2002) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwf136 · Cited by 744
Metadata
- Authors
- Kopec, J. A., Esdaile, J. M., Abrahamowicz, M., Abenhaim, L., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Lamping, D. L., & Williams, J. I.
- Affiliations
- Montreal General Hospital (CA)
- Jewish General Hospital (CA)
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Kopec, Jacek A.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-02
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 151-161
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131636335
- Cited by
- 242
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 2.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pharesst.irsst.qc.ca
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PhareSST (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, back pain, functional disability, disability assessment, patient-reported outcome measures, item response theory, scale development, factor analysis, test-retest reliability, item-total correlation
- MeSH terms
- Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Back Pain, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Disabled Persons, Persons with Disabilities, Health Status, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Discriminant Analysis
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
