Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23479209›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2013

Measurement properties of the QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the QuickDASH: a systematic review.

Carol A Kennedy, Dorcas E Beaton, Peter Smith, Dwayne Van Eerd, Kenneth Tang, Taucha Inrig, Sheilah Hogg-Johnson, Denise Linton, Rachel Couban

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Loss to Follow-up After Tendon Repair: Impact on Functional Recovery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Carol A KennedyInstitute for Work and Health, 481 University Avenue, Suite 800, Toronto, ON, M5G 2E9, Canada, ckennedy@iwh.on.ca.
Dorcas E Beaton
Peter Smith
Dwayne Van Eerd
Kenneth Tang
Taucha Inrig
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson
Denise Linton
Rachel Couban

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify and synthesize evidence for the measurement properties of the QuickDASH, a shortened version of the 30-item DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) instrument.

methodsThis systematic review used a best evidence synthesis approach to critically appraise the measurement properties [using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN)] of the QuickDASH and cross-cultural adaptations. A standard search strategy was conducted between 2005 (year of first publication of QuickDASH) and March 2011 in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL.

resultsThe search identified 14 studies to include in the best evidence synthesis of the QuickDASH. A further 11 studies were identified on eight cross-cultural adaptation versions.

conclusionsMany measurement properties of the QuickDASH have been evaluated in multiple studies and across most of the measurement properties. The best evidence synthesis of the QuickDASH English version suggests that this tool is performing well with strong positive evidence for reliability and validity (hypothesis testing), and moderate positive evidence for structural validity testing. Strong negative evidence was found for responsiveness due to lower correlations with global estimates of change. Information about the measurement properties of the cross-cultural adaptation versions is still lacking, or the available information is of poor overall methodological quality.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationQuality of LifeArm InjuriesCross-Cultural ComparisonHand InjuriesHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareReproducibility of ResultsShoulderShoulder InjuriesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

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.