Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 290

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

Reliability, Construct Validity, and Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy

Young, Ian A., Cleland, Joshua A., Michener, Lori A., Brown, Chris·2010·American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychometric properties of the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale in a cohort of patients with cervical radiculopathy. DESIGN: A single-group repeated-measures design. Patients (n = 165) presenting to physical therapy with cervical radiculopathy completed the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale at the baseline examination and at a follow-up. At the time of follow-up, all patients also completed the Global Rating of Change, which was used to dichotomize patients as improved or stable. Baseline and follow-up scores were used to determine the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and minimal levels of detectable and clinically important change for the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale. RESULTS: Both the Neck Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale exhibited fair test-retest reliability, whereas the Patient-Specific Functional Scale exhibited poor reliability in patients with cervical radiculopathy. All three outcome measures showed adequate responsiveness in this patient population. The minimal detectable change was 13.4 for the Neck Disability Index, 3.3 for the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and 4.1 for the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. The threshold for the minimal clinically important difference was 8.5 for the Neck Disability Index and 2.2 for both the Patient-Specific Functional Scale and Numeric Pain Rating Scale. CONCLUSIONS: In light of the varied distribution of symptoms in patients with cervical radiculopathy, future studies should investigate the psychometric properties of other neck-related disability measures in this patient population.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/phm.0b013e3181ec98e6

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 290

Metadata

Authors
Young, I. A., Cleland, J. A., Michener, L. A., & Brown, C.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
Published
2010-10
Volume
89
Issue
10
Pages
831-839
ISSN
0894-9115 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2039324939
Cited by
290
References
22
FWCI
5.94
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: Reliability, Construct Validity, and Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/phm.0b013e3181ec98e6
The paper
Young, I. A., Cleland, J. A., Michener, L. A., & Brown, C. (2010). Reliability, Construct Validity, and Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1097/phm.0b013e3181ec98e6

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.