Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21069545›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2011

Responsiveness of the 24-, 18- and 11-item versions of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire.

Luciana Gazzi Macedo, Chris G Maher, Jane Latimer, Mark J Hancock, Luciana A C Machado, James H McAuley

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Pain Scales: What Are They and What Do They Mean.Current pain and headache reports · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Luciana Gazzi MacedoThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of Sydney, PO Box M201, Missenden Rd, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. lucianagazzi@hotmail.com
Chris G Maher
Jane Latimer
Mark J Hancock
Luciana A C Machado
James H McAuley

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several versions of the 24-item Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) have been proposed; however, their responsiveness has not been extensively explored. The objective of this study was to compare the responsiveness of four versions of the RMDQ. Perceived disability was measured using the 24-item, two 18-item and an 11-item RMDQ on 1,069 low back pain patients from six randomised controlled trials. Responsiveness was calculated using effect size, Guyatt's responsiveness index (GRI) and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. Effect size analyses showed that both 18-item versions of the RMDQ were superior to the 24- and 11-item versions of the RMDQ. GRI showed that the 24- and 18-item versions of the RMDQ were similar but more responsive than the 11-item. ROC curves revealed that the 11-item was less responsive than the other three versions, which had similar responsiveness. The results of this study demonstrate that the 24-item and both 18-item versions of the RMDQ have similar responsiveness with all having superior responsiveness to the 11-item.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHealth SurveysHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21069545
PMCPMC3048224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.