Cited by 1,458Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPsychometric Methodologies and TestingMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Global Rating of Change Scales: A Review of Strengths and Weaknesses and Considerations for Design

Open access
Kamper, Steven J, Maher, Christopher G, Mackay, Grant·2009·Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

Abstract

Most clinicians ask their patients to rate whether their health condition has improved or deteriorated over time and then use this information to guide management decisions. Many studies also use patient-rated change as an outcome measure to determine the efficacy of a particular treatment. Global rating of change (GRC) scales provide a method of obtaining this information in a manner that is quick, flexible, and efficient. As with any outcome measure, however, meaningful interpretation of results can only be undertaken with due consideration of the clinimetric properties, strengths, and weaknesses of the instrument. The purpose of this article is to summarize this information to assist appropriate interpretation of the GRC results and to provide evidence-informed advice to guide design and administration of GRC scales. These considerations are relevant and applicable to the use of GRC scales both in the clinic and in research.

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 · 10.1179/jmt.2009.17.3.163

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. American Physical Therapy Association. Guide to Physical Therapy Practice. 2 nd ed. Phys Ther 2001;81:9-746.
  2. gLOBAL RAtINg OF ChANge sCALes: A RevIew OF stReNgths AND weAkNesses AND CONsIDeRAtIONs FOR DesIgN
  3. Deyo RA, Inui TS. Toward clinical ap pli- cations of health status measures: Sensitiv- ity of scale to clinically important changes. Health Serv Res 1984;19:275-289.
  4. Bombadier C. Outcomes assessment in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders. Spine 2000;25:3100-3103.
  5. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt Gh. Mea- surement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials 1989;10:407-415.
  6. haspeslagh S, van Suijlekom h, Lame I, Kessels A, van Kleef M, Weber W. Ran- domised controlled trial of cervical ra dio- frequency lesions as a treatment for cer vi- cogenic headache. BMC Anesthes 2006; 6:1.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kamper, S. J., Maher, C. G., & Mackay, G.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Venue
Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy
Published
2009-07
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
163-170
ISSN
  • 1066-9817 (ISSN-L)
  • 2042-6186
OpenAlex
W2125405653
Cited by
1,458
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 133 · 2025: 148 · 2024: 151 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 129 · 2021: 169 · 2020: 139 · 2019: 95 · 2018: 80 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 21
FWCI
11.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
global rating of change, outcome measures, clinimetric properties, scale design, patient-reported outcomes, treatment efficacy, manual therapy

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