ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2006
Discriminative validity and responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index among Japanese outpatients with lumbar conditions.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Difficulties in using Oswestry Disability Index in Indian patients and validity and reliability of translator-assisted Oswestry Disability Index.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2015Trial
- Responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire in Italian subjects with sub-acute and chronic low back pain.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2012Trial
- Operative and non-operative treatment of symptomatic adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter observational study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Observational
- Measurement Properties of the Japanese Oswestry Disability Index in Preoperative Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Effect of Pain and Numbness: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Preoperative Functional Mobility as a Predictor of Exceeding the Planned Length of Hospital Stay after Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Spinal Stenosis.Progress in rehabilitation medicine · 2026Article
- Long-Term Prognosis and Risk Factors for Low Back Pain-Related Disorders in the General Population: A 7-Year Follow-Up of the Wakayama Spine Study.Spine surgery and related research · 2025Article
- Article
- Differences in Lumbar-Pelvic Rhythm Between Sedentary Office Workers with and Without Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The forgotten spine score: study protocol for a novel patient-centered outcome measure in lumbar spine fusion surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Construct validation of the Japanese Core Outcome Measures Index and the impact of diseases on patient-reported outcome measures in preoperative patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and disk herniation: a single-center observational study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Observational
- Association Between Preoperative Neuropathic Pain and Patient Reported Outcome Measures After Cervical Spinal Cord Decompression Surgery.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Changes in Iranian People with Lumbar Disc Herniation Following Physiotherapy.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2024Article
- Circumferential Bone Fusion in Adult Spinal Deformity via Combination of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion and Grade 2 Posterior Column Osteotomy.Global spine journal · 2023Article
- Article
- The relationship between the Keele STarT back screening tool, the short form of central sensitivity inventory and health-related quality of life in patients with low back pain.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2022Article
- Clinical impact of short limited lumbar fusion for adult spinal deformity with postural and radiological abnormalities.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Responsiveness of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Index, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire, the 8-Item Short Form Health Survey, and the Euroqol 5 dimensions 5 level in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022Article
- Risk factors for worsening sexual function after lumbar spine surgery and characteristics of non-responders to the questionnaire of sex life.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021Article
- Minimum clinically important change for outcome scores among patients aged 75 or over undergoing lumbar spine surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021Article
- Diabetes is associated with greater leg pain and worse patient-reported outcomes at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is one of the most used assessment scales for patients with spine conditions, and translations into several languages have already been available. However, the scale's discriminative validity and responsiveness to the clinical change was somewhat understudied in these translated versions of the ODI. In this study, we independently developed a Japanese version of the ODI, and tested its discriminative and responsive performances among outpatients with various spinal conditions. We recruited 167 outpatients from seven participating clinics, and concurrently measured the translated ODI and MOS Short Form 36 (SF36) as a reference scale. We also obtained from medical records clinical information such as diagnoses, the past history of surgery, and existence of subjective symptoms and clinical signs. For testing discriminative validity, scores were compared by the number of symptoms and signs, with the trend test. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was also conducted to compare ODI and SF36 in their performance to discriminate the existence of signs/symptoms, by chi-square test on the area under ROC curve (AUC). For 35 patients (17 clinically stable, 18 undergoing surgery and clinically significantly changed), the two scales were repeatedly administered after 3-6 months to compare responsiveness by using ROC analysis. The translated ODI and the SF36 Physical Function (PF) subscale showed a significant trend increase as the numbers of symptoms/signs increased. They also showed comparable performance in discriminating the existence of signs/symptoms (AUC=0.70-0.76 for ODI, 0.69-0.70 for SF36 PF, P=0.15-0.81), and clinical status change over time (AUC=0.82 for ODI, 0.72 for SF36 PF, P=0.31). Our results showed that the translated Japanese ODI showed fair discriminative validity and responsiveness as the original English scale showed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16477452What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.