CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 358Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationWorkplace Health and Well-being

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development of a short form of the orebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire

Linton, Steven J., Nicholas, Michael, MacDonald, Shane·2011·Spine
DOI 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f8f775
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A longitudinal design where the questionnaire was completed at a pretest and predictive ability evaluated with a 1-year follow-up. A second sample was employed to provide a replication. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to validate a short form of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (ÖMSPQ). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several studies demonstrate the research and clinical utility of the ÖMSPQ. Calls have been made for a shorter form that requires less time in administering. METHODS: The short version was constructed by taking two items from each of the five factors shown to have predictive power. It was then tested against the long form in two samples of people with musculoskeletal pain where one reflects an occupational health care population (N = 324) and the other a primary care population (N = 183) thus providing a built-in replication. All participants completed the ÖMSPQ and were then followed over the course of a year to evaluate disability as measured by sick leave. RESULTS: The correlation between the short and long forms was 0.91. The receiver operating characteristic curve was nearly identical for the long and short versions of the questionnaire (e.g., primary care sample: 0.84 vs. 0.81; occupational sample: 0.72 vs. 0.70). Of those who developed disability, a cutoff of 50 on the short version identified 85% in the occupational and 83% in the primary care samples which was nearly as good as the full version. CONCLUSION: The short form of the ÖMSPQ is appropriate for clinical and research purposes, since it is nearly as accurate as the longer version.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f8f775

Cites

22 of 22 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 22 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Shaw, 2006, ehabil, 16, 591

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–357 of 357

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Linton, S. J., Nicholas, M., & MacDonald, S.
Affiliations
  • Örebro University (SE)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
  • Linton, Steven J.
  • MacDonald, Shane
ORCID
Venue
Spine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2011-10
Volume
36
Issue
22
Pages
1891-1895
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f8f775
OpenAlex
W2163072018
Cited by
358
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire, short-form questionnaire, musculoskeletal pain, screening questionnaire validation, sick leave, disability prediction, occupational health services, primary care, questionnaire length reduction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Health Services, Pain Measurement, Predictive Value of Tests, Primary Health Care, Prognosis, Surveys and Questionnaires, ROC Curve, Severity of Illness Index, Sweden, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation, Sick Leave, Young Adult, Musculoskeletal Pain

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