The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measurement Properties of the Neck Disability Index: A Systematic Review
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of clinical measurement. OBJECTIVE: To find and synthesize evidence on the psychometric properties and usefulness of the neck disability index (NDI). BACKGROUND: The NDI is the most commonly used outcome measure for neck pain, and a synthesis of knowledge should provide a deeper understanding of its use and limitations. METHODS AND MEASURES: Using a standard search strategy (1966 to September 2008) and 4 databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsychInfo), a structured search was conducted and supplemented by web and hand searching. In total, 37 published primary studies, 3 reviews, and 1 in-press paper were analyzed. Pairs of raters conducted data extraction and critical appraisal using structured tools. Ranking of quality and descriptive synthesis were performed. RESULTS: Horizon estimation suggested the potential for 1 missed paper. The agreement between raters on quality assessments was high(kappa = 0.82). Half of the studies reached a quality level greater than 70%. Failures to report clear psychometric objectives/hypotheses or to rationalize the sample size were the most common design flaws. Studies often focused on less clinically applicable properties, like construct validity or group reliability, than transferable data, like known group differences or absolute reliability (standard error of measurement [SEM] or minimum detectable change [MDC]). Most studies suggest that the NDI has acceptable reliability, although intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) range from 0.50 to 0.98. Longer test intervals and the definition of stable can influence reliability estimates. A number of high-quality published (Korean, Dutch, Spanish, French, Brazilian Portuguese) and commercially supported translations are available. The NDI is considered a 1-dimensional measure that can be interpreted as an interval scale. Some studies question these assumptions. The MDC is around 5/50 for uncomplicated neck pain and up to 10/50 for cervical radiculopathy. The reported clinically important difference (CID) is inconsistent across different studies ranging from 5/50 to 19/50. The NDI is strongly correlated (>0.70) to a number of similar indices and moderately related to both physical and mental aspects of general health. CONCLUSION: The NDI has sufficient support and usefulness to retain its current status as the most commonly used self-report measure for neck pain. More studies of CID in different clinical populations and the relationship to subjective/work/function categories are required.
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
Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014 · Cited by 14,542
The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity.
Vernon, H. T., & Mior, S. A. (1991) · PubMed · Cited by 3,048
The Neck Disability Index: State-of-the-Art, 1991-2008
Vernon, H. (2008) · Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.006 · Cited by 1,009
Cleland, J. A., Childs, J. D., & Whitman, J. M. (2008) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.126 · Cited by 749
Neck Pain in the General Population
Bovim, G., Schrader, H., & Sand, T. (1994) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-199406000-00001 · Cited by 671
Prevalence, Determinants, and Consequences of Chronic Neck Pain in Finland
Mäkela, M., Heliövaara, M., Sievers, K., Impivaara, O., Knekt, P., & Aromaa, A. (1991) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116038 · Cited by 546
Risk factors for neck pain: a longitudinal study in the general population
Croft, P. R., Lewis, M., Papageorgiou, A. C., Thomas, E., Jayson, M. I. V., Macfarlane, G. J., & Silman, A. J. (2001) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(01)00334-7 · Cited by 485
Pool, J. J. M., Ostelo, R. W. J. G., Hoving, J. L., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2007) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31815cf75b · Cited by 445
The Patient-Specific Functional Scale: Validation of Its Use in Persons With Neck Dysfunction
Westaway, M. D., Stratford, P. W., & Binkley, J. M. (1998) · Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.2519/jospt.1998.27.5.331 · Cited by 425
Cleland, J. A., Fritz, J. M., Whitman, J. M., & Palmer, J. A. (2006) · Spine · doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000201241.90914.22 · Cited by 398
Cited by
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders
Gross, A., Kay, T. M., Paquin, J.-P., Blanchette, S., Lalonde, P., Christie, T., Dupont, G., Graham, N., Burnie, S. J., Gelley, G., et al. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004250.pub5 · Cited by 613
Self-citationManual therapy and exercise for neck pain: A systematic review
Miller, J., Gross, A., D'Sylva, J., Burnie, S. J., Goldsmith, C. H., Graham, N., Haines, T., Brønfort, G., & Hoving, J. L. (2010) · Manual Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.math.2010.02.007 · Cited by 393
Self-citationYoung, I. A., Cleland, J. A., Michener, L. A., & Brown, C. (2010) · American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/phm.0b013e3181ec98e6 · Cited by 290
Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: A Cochrane Review
Gross, A., Miller, J., D’Sylva, J., Burnie, S. J., Goldsmith, C. H., Graham, N., Haines, T., Brønfort, G., & Hoving, J. L. (2010) · Manual Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002 · Cited by 285
Self-citationArcher, K. R., Seebach, C. L., Mathis, S. L., Riley, L. H., & Wegener, S. T. (2014) · The Spine Journal · doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.087 · Cited by 118
Metadata
- Authors
- MacDermid, J. C., Walton, D. M., Avery, S., Blanchard, A., Etruw, E., McAlpine, C., & Goldsmith, C. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 400-C12
- ISSN
- 0190-6011 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-1344
- OpenAlex
- W2068615082
- Cited by
- 954
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 3.27
- 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: Measurement Properties of the Neck Disability Index: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2519/jospt.2009.2930
- The paper
- MacDermid, J. C., Walton, D. M., Avery, S., Blanchard, A., Etruw, E., McAlpine, C., & Goldsmith, C. H. (2009). Measurement Properties of the Neck Disability Index: A Systematic Review. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2009.2930
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.