CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments

Suarez‐Almazor, M. E., Kendall, C., Johnson, J. A., Skeith, K., Vincent, D.·2000·Rheumatology
DOI 10.1093/rheumatology/39.7.783
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the discriminative performance over time of specific, generic and preference-based instruments in patients with low back pain (LBP) in clinical settings. METHODS: Forty-six consecutive patients with LBP participated in the study. Self-response questionnaires were administered at baseline and 3 and 6 months, including the following instruments: Oswestry (specific for LBP), SF-36 (generic), EuroQol (EQ-5D) and Health Utilities Index (HUI) (preference-based). EQ-5D and HUI weights were derived from previously published evaluations in the general population. Patients were asked to compare their health status with their baseline health and were categorized on the basis of an ordinal scale as: (a) improved; (b) stable; or (c) worse. Changes in the instruments were evaluated by rescaling the instruments over the same scale interval and by estimating standardized effect sizes between two time points for the three categories of change. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (80%) completed both the baseline and the 3-month questionnaire and 34 the baseline and 6-month questionnaires (74%). Overall, at both time points, approximately half of the patients reported no changes in their health status. Correlations between instruments were generally low, suggesting that they measure different health domains. The scales which discriminated best between patients who improved and those who deteriorated at 3 months were the Oswestry, the HUI, the EQ-5D and the SF-36 bodily pain and emotional role subscales. The SF-36 subscales appeared to have a floor effect for those patients who had deteriorated. CONCLUSIONS: Most SF-36 subscales did not adequately reflect changes in the health status of patients with LBP, mostly for those who reported deterioration. Preference-derived quality-of-life scores appeared to discriminate among patients who improved and those who deteriorated, although not as consistently as the disease-specific measure (Oswestry). Additional research is needed to evaluate the role of generic measures of quality of life in the assessment of patients with LBP before they can be widely implemented in clinical settings or outcomes research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/rheumatology/39.7.783

Cites

20 of 20 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

Show all 20 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–134 of 134

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Suarez‐Almazor, M. E., Kendall, C., Johnson, J. A., Skeith, K., & Vincent, D.
Affiliations
University of Alberta (CA)
ORCID
Johnson, J. A.
Venue
Rheumatology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2000-07
Volume
39
Issue
7
Pages
783-790
ISSN
  • 1462-0324 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-0332
DOI
10.1093/rheumatology/39.7.783
OpenAlex
W2146271699
Cited by
134
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Lara D. Veeken (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • 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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Keywords
low back pain, health indicators, Oswestry Disability Index, SF-36, EQ-5D, Health Utilities Index, preference-based health-related quality of life, generic health-related quality of life, floor effect, change detection, standardized effect size
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Female, Health Status Indicators, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Low Back Pain, Disease Progression

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