Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 733

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Development and Evaluation of a Disease-Specific Quality of Life Measurement Tool for Shoulder Instability

Kirkley, Alexandra, Griffin, Sharon, McLintock, Heidi, Ng, Linda·1998·The American Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop a valid, reliable, and responsive disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for patients with shoulder instability. Development included 1) identification of a specific patient population; 2) generation of issues specific to the “disease” (“items”) from reviewing the literature, interviewing health caregivers, and interviewing patients representing all demographics, disease type and severity, and treatments; 3) item reduction using patient-generated frequency-importance products and correlation matrices; and 4) pretesting the prototype instrument on 2 groups of 10 patients. The final instrument, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, has 21 items representing 4 domains. The instrument attributes (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) were evaluated. Construct validation demonstrated that this index correlated predictably with other measures. Reliability was very high at 2 weeks and 3 months, and the index was more responsive (sensitive to change) than five other shoulder measurement tools (the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scale; The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form; the UCLA Shoulder Rating Scale; the Constant Score; and the Rowe Rating Scale), a global health instrument (the SF12), and range of motion. Since the patient's perception of changes in health status is the most important indicator of the success of a treatment, we suggest that this measurement tool be used as the primary outcome measure to evaluate treatments in this patient population, although it can also be used for monitoring patients' progress in clinical practice.

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 · 10.1177/03635465980260060501

Cites

35 of 35 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 35 references

Cited by

See all 733

Metadata

Authors
Kirkley, A., Griffin, S., McLintock, H., & Ng, L.
Venue
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Published
1998-11
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
764-772
ISSN
  • 0363-5465 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3365
OpenAlex
W2136649473
Cited by
733
References
35
FWCI
5.18
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 Development and Evaluation of a Disease-Specific Quality of Life Measurement Tool for Shoulder Instability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/03635465980260060501
The paper
Kirkley, A., Griffin, S., McLintock, H., & Ng, L. (1998). The Development and Evaluation of a Disease-Specific Quality of Life Measurement Tool for Shoulder Instability. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465980260060501

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.