CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,198Chronic Disease Management StrategiesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome

GROLL, D, TO, T, BOMBARDIER, C, WRIGHT, J·2005·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background and objectives Physical function is an important measure of success of many medical and surgical interventions. Ability to adjust for comorbid disease is essential in health services research and epidemiologic studies. Current indices have primarily been developed with mortality as the outcome, and are not sensitive enough when the outcome is physical function. The objective of this study was to develop a self-administered Functional Comorbidity Index with physical function as the outcome.Methods The index was developed using two databases: a cross-sectional, simple random sample of 9,423 Canadian adults and a sample of 28,349 US adults seeking treatment for spine ailments. The primary outcome measure was the SF-36 physical function (PF) subscale.Results The Functional Comorbidity Index, an 18-item list of diagnoses, showed stronger association with physical function (model R(2) = 0.29) compared with the Charlson (model R(2) = 0.18), and Kaplan-Feinstein (model R(2) = 0.07) indices. The Functional Comorbidity Index correctly classified patients into high and low function, in 77% of cases.Conclusion This new index contains diagnoses such as arthritis not found on indices used to predict mortality, and the FCI explained more variance in PF scores compared to indices designed to predict mortality.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,198

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
GROLL, D., TO, T., BOMBARDIER, C., & WRIGHT, J.
Affiliations
  • Queen's University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Institute for Work & Health (CA)
Corresponding author
GROLL, D
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-06
Volume
58
Issue
6
Pages
595-602
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018
OpenAlex
W1971721633
Cited by
1,198
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 75 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 75 · 2014: 75 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 43
FWCI
6.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Health Canada
  • Canadian Arthritis Network
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
comorbidity index, physical function, Functional Comorbidity Index, SF-36 physical function, Charlson Comorbidity Index, arthritis, spinal disorders
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Osteoporosis, Spinal Diseases, Comorbidity, Databases, Factual, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Focus Groups, Recovery of Function

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