CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Evidence on the measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments is largely missing in patients with low back pain: A systematic review

Open access
Chiarotto, Alessandro, Terwee, Caroline B., Kamper, Steven J., Boers, Maarten, Ostelo, Raymond W.·2018·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To synthesize the measurement properties of six health-related quality of life instruments (Short Form 36 [SF-36], Short Form 12 [SF-12], EuroQol 5D-3L [EQ-5D-3L], EuroQol 5D-5L [EQ-5D-5L], Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health [PROMIS-GH-10]) in patients with low back pain (LBP). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Six electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, and Google Scholar) were searched (July 2017). Studies assessing any measurement property in nonspecific LBP patients were included. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and assessed the risk of bias (COSMIN checklist). Consensus-based criteria were used to rate measurement properties results as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent; a modified GRADE approach was adopted for evidence synthesis. RESULTS High quality evidence was found for insufficient construct validity of SF-36 summary scores, and EQ-5D-3L utility and visual analogue scale scores. Moderate evidence was found for sufficient construct validity of SF-12 physical summary score and inconsistent responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L utility score. Very low quality evidence was found on each instrument's content validity; very low to low evidence underpinned the other assessed measurement properties. EQ-5D-5L, NHP and PROMIS Global Health-10 were not evaluated in LBP patients. CONCLUSION Documentation of the measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments in LBP is incomplete. Future clinimetric studies should prioritize content validity.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review found that measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments in low back pain are largely understudied, with very low quality evidence for content validity across six instruments. High-quality evidence indicated insufficient construct validity for SF-36 summary scores and EQ-5D-3L utility/VAS scores, while EQ-5D-5L, NHP, and PROMIS-GH-10 had little or no LBP-specific evaluation.

Key findings

  • From 4,809 records, 95 full texts were retrieved, 26 were eligible, and 9 more were found by citation tracking, yielding 35 included studies; 17 reported instrument development and 18 assessed other measurement properties.
  • High quality evidence showed insufficient construct validity for SF-36 physical and mental summary scores and for EQ-5D-3L utility and visual analogue scale scores.
  • Moderate evidence showed sufficient construct validity for the SF-12 physical summary score and inconsistent responsiveness for the EQ-5D-3L utility score; content validity for each instrument was supported by very low quality evidence.
  • The abstract reports EQ-5D-5L, NHP, and PROMIS-GH-10 were not evaluated in LBP patients; the results note one NHP construct validity study in which 37 of 48 hypotheses were met (77%), with low quality evidence.

Methods

  • Systematic review conducted according to COSMIN guidance and PRISMA, with a protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015020021).
  • Six electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, Google Scholar) were searched in July 2017; studies were included if they assessed a measurement property in adults with nonspecific LBP or samples with at least 75% nonspecific LBP.
  • Two reviewers independently screened studies and assessed risk of bias with the COSMIN checklist; consensus-based criteria rated results as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent, and a modified GRADE approach rated quality of evidence.

Limitations

  • The paper states that evidence syntheses pooled studies from different cultures, countries, and languages, and that the search strategy targeted LBP rather than instrument development studies in generic populations.
  • The paper states that the reviewed instruments predate current COSMIN standards and that EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS-GH-10 were developed later, so fewer LBP studies exist for them.
  • Evident from the text: no included studies assessed cross-cultural validity for any instrument, and content validity evidence was very low and often based only on reviewers’ ratings because development studies lacked patient involvement and cognitive interviews.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.006

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 34 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Very low quality evidence was found on each instrument's content validity in patients with low back pain.

    “Very low quality evidence was found on each instrument's content validity; very low to low evidence underpinned the other assessed measurement properties.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Moderate quality evidence indicates inconsistent responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L utility score in patients with low back pain.

    “Moderate evidence was found for sufficient construct validity of SF-12 physical summary score and inconsistent responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L utility score.”
    • Also stated in: § 3.3.3. Other measurement properties · plain
      “There was moderate quality evidence for inconsistent responsiveness of the utility score (Table 3), as results were largely inconsistent across studies (Appendix 3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Moderate quality evidence indicates sufficient construct validity of the SF-12 physical summary score in patients with low back pain.

    “Moderate evidence was found for sufficient construct validity of SF-12 physical summary score and inconsistent responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L utility score.”
    • Also stated in: § 3.2.3. Other measurement properties · plain
      “Moderate quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias) (Appendix 2) of sufficient construct validity was found for PCS”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Correlations of SF-36 and EQ-5D-3L scores with other instruments are not as expected in patients with low back pain.

    “Caution should be used in assuming the validity of the SF-36 and EQ-5D-3L scores in patients with LBP, as there is high quality evidence suggesting that correlations of these scores with other instruments are not as expected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    High quality evidence indicates insufficient construct validity of SF-36 summary scores in patients with low back pain.

    “High quality evidence was found for insufficient construct validity of SF-36 summary scores, and EQ-5D-3L utility and visual analogue scale scores.”
    • Also stated in: § 3.1.3. Other measurement properties · plain
      “High quality evidence of insufficient construct validity was found for both PCS and MCS scores (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 20
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 23

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    EQ-5D-5L, NHP and PROMIS Global Health-10 were not evaluated in patients with low back pain.

    “EQ-5D-5L, NHP and PROMIS Global Health-10 were not evaluated in LBP patients.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    18 other included studies evaluated measurement properties.

    “Among the other 18 included studies, three evaluated the SF-36 and the EQ-5D-3L simultaneously”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The only study assessing SF-12 internal consistency was of very good quality and found Cronbach's alpha 0.77 and 0.80 for PCS and MCS scores.

    “The only study [54] assessing internal consistency was of very good quality and found Cronbach's alpha equal to 0.77 and 0.80 for PCS and MCS scores, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [54] Luo, 2003, Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the short form 12-item survey (SF-12) in patients with back pain, Spine source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    No studies tested structural validity, internal consistency, or cross-cultural validity of EQ-5D-3L in patients with low back pain.

    “No studies tested structural validity, internal consistency, or cross-cultural validity in patients with LBP.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The EQ-5D-3L development was rated inadequate because no patients were involved, no clear definition of the construct was provided, and no cognitive interview study was performed.

    “The EQ-5D-3L development was rated inadequate because no patients were involved in the instrument development, no clear definition of the construct to be measured was provided, and no cognitive interview study was performed (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The SF-12 development was considered inadequate as no patients were involved and no cognitive interview study was performed.

    “The SF-12 was derived from the SF-36 using regression methods [33]; its development was considered inadequate as no patients were involved, and no cognitive interview study was performed (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Ware, 1996, A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity, Med Care source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The SF-36 development was considered of inadequate quality because no patients were involved and no cognitive interview study was performed.

    “The SF-36 development was considered of inadequate quality because no patients were involved, and no cognitive interview study was performed (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    35 studies were included in the review.

    “therefore, 35 studies were included (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    17 included articles presented information on the development of the instruments.

    “Seventeen of the included articles presented information on the development of the instruments (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In Suarez-Almazor et al., inconsistent results were found (very low quality evidence) as 11 of 32 hypotheses were met (34%).

    “in the study by Suarez-Almazor et al. [46], inconsistent results were found (very low quality evidence due to risk of bias and imprecision) as 11 of 32 hypotheses were met (34%) (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Suarez-Almazor, 2000, Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments, Rheumatology (Oxford) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    MIC values were larger than the smallest detectable change values, providing low quality evidence for sufficient measurement error for SF-12 PCS and MCS.

    “The MIC values presented in this study were larger than the smallest detectable change values (Table 4), providing low quality evidence for sufficient measurement error for both PCS and MCS.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    There is no evidence clearly indicating the best way to synthesize evidence on instrument measurement properties.

    “splitting the results of these studies may be considered equally contentious as there is no evidence clearly indicating the best way to synthesize evidence on instrument measurement properties.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    All other properties of any instrument were underpinned by lower quality evidence or not assessed.

    “All other properties of any instrument were underpinned by lower quality evidence or not assessed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    It remains unclear if HRQoL can be adequately expressed using the total score of a multidimensional instrument or only by the subscale scores.

    “HRQoL definitions usually highlight the multidimensional nature of the domain, but it remains unclear if HRQoL can be adequately expressed using the total score of a multidimensional instrument or only by the subscales scores.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Construct validity and responsiveness were the most often assessed properties, mainly for SF-36, SF-12, and EQ-5D-3L.

    “Construct validity and responsiveness were the most often assessed properties, mainly for SF-36, SF-12, and EQ-5D-3L.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    One study assessed the construct validity of the Nottingham Health Profile subscales compared to the SF-36 subscales, providing low quality evidence of sufficient construct validity, with 37 of 48 hypotheses met (77%).

    “One study [48] assessed the construct validity of its subscales as compared to the SF-36 subscales, providing low quality evidence (due to risk of bias, Table 3) of sufficient construct validity as 37 of 48 hypotheses were met (77%, Appendix 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] Bullinger, 1995, German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 health survey: preliminary results from the IQOLA project. International quality of life assessment, Soc Sci Med source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Eight articles on instrument development were found with the initial search and the remaining nine through citation tracking.

    “nevertheless, eight articles on the instruments development were found with the initial search and the remaining nine through citation tracking (Figure 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The development of the PROMIS-GH-10 was rated inadequate because patients were not specifically involved in selecting the most relevant (sub)domains to be included in the instrument, despite patients' involvement in developing PROMIS items.

    “Development was rated inadequate because, despite patients' involvement in developing PROMIS items [69], they were not specifically involved in selecting the most relevant (sub)domains to be included in this instrument (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [69] DeWalt, 2007, Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review, Med Care source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Only the EQ-5D-3L version has been assessed in patients with low back pain and not the EQ-5D-5L.

    “Regarding the EQ-5D, it should be underlined that only the EQ-5D-3L version has been assessed in patients with LBP and not the EQ-5D-5L [30].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Moderate quality evidence was found for SF-12 PCS score inconsistent construct validity and EQ-5D utility score inconsistent responsiveness.

    “Moderate quality evidence was found for SF-12 PCS score inconsistent construct validity and EQ-5D utility score inconsistent responsiveness (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Because no studies assessed the unidimensionality of SF-36 subscales, internal consistency results cannot provide evidence in support of this measurement property.

    “According to recent COSMIN guidance [24], because no studies assessed the unidimensionality of the SF-36 subscales, these results cannot provide evidence in support of this measurement property.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [24] Prinsen, 2018, COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    This SF-12 internal consistency study does not represent evidence on this measurement property because the unidimensionality of these scores was not assessed in any study.

    “This study does not represent evidence on this measurement property because the unidimensionality of these scores was not assessed in any study [24].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [24] Prinsen, 2018, COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Consensus-based criteria were used to rate measurement properties results as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent.

    “Consensus-based criteria were used to rate measurement properties results as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent; a modified GRADE approach was adopted for evidence synthesis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    A priori hypotheses were formulated by the review team to evaluate construct validity and responsiveness.

    “A priori hypotheses were formulated by the review team to evaluate the results of studies on construct validity and responsiveness, based on the results of a previous systematic review on instruments for LBP [40].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [40] Chiarotto, 2016, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index: which has better measurement properties for measuring physical functioning in nonspecific low back pain? Systematic review and meta-analysis, Phys Ther source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For content validity, results of each study were rated by two reviewers independently against 10 established criteria.

    “For content validity, the results of each study were rated by two reviewers (A.C. and C.B.T.) independently against 10 established criteria: five on relevance, one on comprehensiveness, and four on comprehensibility [25].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] Terwee, 2018, COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Potentially eligible full-texts were screened independently by two reviewers.

    “Potentially eligible full-texts were also screened independently by two reviewers (A.C. and R.W.O.).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Two reviewers independently screened the articles.

    “Two reviewers independently screened the articles and assessed the risk of bias (COSMIN checklist).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    A modified GRADE approach was adopted for evidence synthesis.

    “The quality of evidence for each measurement property was rated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach [42] adapted for this type of review”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [42] Guyatt, 2008, GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations, BMJ source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Inclusion criteria were applied by two reviewers independently to titles and abstracts.

    “Inclusion criteria were applied by two reviewers (A.C. and S.J.K.) independently to titles and abstracts retrieved with the searches.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Data on patients' characteristics and results were extracted by one reviewer, and a random 25% was double checked by a second reviewer.

    “For every study, data on patients' characteristics and results were extracted by one reviewer (A.C.), and a random 25% of the extracted information, stratified per instrument, was double checked by a second reviewer (R.W.O.).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Risk of bias was assessed with the COSMIN checklist.

    “The risk of bias of the studies on the other measurement properties was also assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist [23].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Mokkink, 2018, COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The protocol was registered a priori in PROSPERO.

    “The protocol was registered a priori in PROSPERO (https:// www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), number CRD42015020021.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    This study was conducted according to current guidance on systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures.

    “This study was conducted according to current guidance on systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures [7,21,23e25].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7,21,23e25]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Content validity is considered by clinimetric and psychometric experts as the first measurement property to consider when selecting an instrument.

    “Content validity is considered by clinimetric and psychometric experts as the first measurement property to consider when selecting an instrument [7,25].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [7] Prinsen, 2016, How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set”–a practical guideline, Trials source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [25] Terwee, 2018, COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Another potential limitation of this review is that the search strategy was designed to identify studies on patients with low back pain without specifically targeting the development studies of the instruments that were conducted in generic populations.

    “Another potential limitation of this review is that the search strategy was designed to identify studies on patients with LBP (Appendix 1), without specifically targeting the development studies of the instruments that were conducted in generic populations”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    A potential limitation of this review is that the evidence syntheses were performed lumping together studies from different cultures, countries, and languages.

    “A potential limitation is that the evidence syntheses were performed lumping together studies from different cultures, countries, and languages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The SF-36 was not endorsed because it was considered too long for inclusion in every clinical trial, and the EQ-5D because it provided scores that cannot be pooled with the other instruments' scores.

    “On the other hand, the SF-36 was not endorsed because it was considered too long for inclusion in every clinical trial, and the EQ-5D because it provided scores that cannot be pooled with the other instruments' scores (i.e., SF12 and PROMIS-GH-10) [26].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] Chiarotto, 2018, Core outcome measurement instruments for clinical trials in non-specific low back pain, Pain source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    None of the HRQoL instruments met the prespecified 67% cutoff for consensus in an international Delphi process to endorse core instruments for low back pain clinical trials, although the SF-12 came close.

    “The results of this systematic review informed an international and multidisciplinary Delphi process to endorse core instruments for LBP clinical trials; however, none of the HRQoL instruments met the prespecified 67% cutoff for consensus (although the SF-12 came close) [26].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] Chiarotto, 2018, Core outcome measurement instruments for clinical trials in non-specific low back pain, Pain source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The EQ-5D-5L has shown improved validity in other populations.

    “This newer version has shown improved validity in other populations [75].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [75] Janssen, 2013, Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study, Qual Life Res source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The international consortium overseeing the core set initiative for low back pain decided to recommend the SF-12 and the PROMIS-GH-10 for HRQoL.

    “To improve measurement standardization, the international consortium overseeing the core set initiative for LBP decided to recommend the SF-12 and the PROMIS-GH-10 for HRQoL, as they both provide PCS and MCS scores, and the PROMIS-GH-10 represents a free of charge option [26].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] Chiarotto, 2018, Core outcome measurement instruments for clinical trials in non-specific low back pain, Pain source

      Not checked in the free run.

40 of 40

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The SF-12 measures the same construct and has the same target population and context of use as the SF-36.

    “Not reported; assumed same of SF-36”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The EQ-5D-5L measures the same construct and has the same target population and context of use as the EQ-5D-3L.

    “Not reported; assumed same of EQ-5D-3L”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS-GH-10 were developed 10 to 20 years later than the other instruments.

    “given that the EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS-GH-10 were developed 10 to 20 years later than the other instruments”
3 of 3

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • SF-12 PCS construct validity receives opposing ratings

    Major

    The discussion calls the SF-12 PCS construct validity inconsistent, whereas the results rate it sufficient. Both describe the evidence as moderate quality.

  • Abstract says the NHP was not evaluated in LBP patients

    Minor

    The abstract says the NHP was not evaluated, but the results describe a study of its construct validity in patients with LBP.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 87 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Eker, 2007, The relationship between EQ-5D and SF-36 instruments in patients with low back pain, Fizyoterapi Rehabilitasyon, 18, 3
  2. Zwingmann, 1998, Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36): psychometrische analysen der deutschen Version bei Rehabilitanden mit chronischen Rückenschmerzen, Diagnostica, 44, 209

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chiarotto, A., Terwee, C. B., Kamper, S. J., Boers, M., & Ostelo, R. W.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Chiarotto, Alessandro
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-10
Volume
102
Pages
23-37
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.006
OpenAlex
W2804655732
Semantic Scholar
4c6fb85f5f849078fb8dd35a2fa6c61b79c7e451
Cited by
69
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
EUROSPINE
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
low back pain, health-related quality of life, measurement properties, SF-36, SF-12, EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, Nottingham Health Profile, construct validity, content validity, responsiveness, utility scores
MeSH terms
Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Female, Humans, Male, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Research Design, Low Back Pain, Evidence-Based Medicine

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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