The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Reliability and Construct Validity of the Neck Disability Index and Patient Specific Functional Scale in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. Cohort study of patients with cervical radiculopathy undergoing physical therapy. Objectives. Examine the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and minimum levels of detectable and clinically important change for the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in cohort of patients with cervical radiculopathy. Summary of Background Data. To date, no studies have investigated the psychometric properties of the NDI or PSFS in a cohort of patients with cervical radiculopathy. Methods. Thirty-eight patients with cervical radiculopathy undergoing physical therapy completed the NDI and PSFS, and Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) at the baseline examination and at a follow-up. In addition, at follow-up, patients completed a 15-point global rating of change (GROC), which was used to dichotomize patients as improved or stable. Changes in the NDI and PSFS were then used to assess test-retest reliability, construct validity, and minimal levels of detectable and clinically important change. Results. Test-retest reliability was moderate for the NDI (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30–0.90) and high for the PSFS (ICC = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54–0.93). The PSFS was more responsive to change than the NDI. The minimal detectable change for the NDI was 10.2 and for the PSFS 2.1. The minimally clinically important change for the NDI was 7.0 and PSFS 2.0. Conclusions. Our results suggest that the PSFS exhibits superior reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness in this cohort of patients with cervical radiculopathy compared with the NDI. Further research is needed to examine the ability of these measures to accurately reflect changes in individuals, as well as large samples of patients. No studies have yet investigated the reliability or validity of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) or Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in a cohort of patients with cervical radiculopathy. The PSFS exhibited superior reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness in this sample. The PSFS should be considered as an outcome measure for detecting change of status in patients with cervical radiculopathy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 · Cited by 21,856
Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6 · Cited by 4,982
The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods
Jensen, M. P., Karoly, P., & Braver, S. (1986) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9 · Cited by 3,275
The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity.
Vernon, H. T., & Mior, S. A. (1991) · PubMed · Cited by 3,048
Responsiveness of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients with Low Back Pain
Childs, J. D., Piva, S. R., & Fritz, J. M. (2005) · Spine · doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000164099.92112.29 · Cited by 1,481
Self-citationFritz, J. M., & Irrgang, J. J. (2001) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/81.2.776 · Cited by 1,045
Self-citationAssessing Disability and Change on Individual Patients: A Report of a Patient Specific Measure
Stratford, P. (1995) · Physiotherapy Canada · doi:10.3138/ptc.47.4.258 · Cited by 928
Wyrwich, K. W., Tierney, W. M., & Wolinsky, F. D. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00071-2 · Cited by 862
Wainner, R. S., Fritz, J. M., Irrgang, J. J., Boninger, M. L., Delitto, A., & Allison, S. (2003) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200301010-00014 · Cited by 598
Self-citation
Cited by
Mintken, P. E., Glynn, P., & Cleland, J. A. (2009) · Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jse.2008.12.015 · Cited by 600
Self-citationCook, J., Hislop, J., Adewuyi, T., Harrild, K., Altman, D., Ramsay, C., Fraser, C., Buckley, B., Fayers, P., Harvey, I., et al. (2014) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta18280 · Cited by 194
Fowler, C. A., Ballistrea, L. M., Mazzone, K. E., Martin, A. M., Kaplan, H., Kip, K. E., Ralston, K., Murphy, J. L., & Winkler, S. L. (2019) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/11266 · Cited by 36
Rysstad, T., Grotle, M., Klokk, L. P., & Tveter, A. T. (2020) · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · doi:10.1186/s12891-020-03289-z · Cited by 30
Anandkumar, S. (2015) · Physiotherapy Theory and Practice · doi:10.3109/09593985.2014.989296 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Cleland, J. A., Fritz, J. M., Whitman, J. M., & Palmer, J. A.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 598-602
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1997816173
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 9.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Reliability and Construct Validity of the Neck Disability Index and Patient Specific Functional Scale in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.brs.0000201241.90914.22
- The paper
- Cleland, J. A., Fritz, J. M., Whitman, J. M., & Palmer, J. A. (2006). The Reliability and Construct Validity of the Neck Disability Index and Patient Specific Functional Scale in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000201241.90914.22
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
