Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23505459›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Evaluation of construct and criterion validity for the 'Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs' (LOAD) clinical metrology instrument and comparison to two other instruments.

Myles Benjamin Walton, Emily Cowderoy, Duncan Lascelles, John F Innes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
124citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

64 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

4 authors.

Myles Benjamin WaltonDepartment of Musculoskeletal Biology and School of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, United Kingdom.
Emily Cowderoy
Duncan Lascelles
John F Innes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo test the 'Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs' (LOAD) questionnaire for construct and criterion validity, and to similarly test the Helsinki Chronic Pain Index (HCPI) and the Canine Brief Pain Inventory (CBPI).

designProspective Study. ANIMALS: 222 dogs with osteoarthritis. PROCEDURE: Osteoarthritis was diagnosed in a cohort of dogs on the basis of clinical history and orthopedic examination. Force-platform analysis was performed and a "symmetry index" for peak vertical force (PVF) was calculated. Owners completed LOAD, CBPI and HCPI instruments. As a test of construct validity, inter-instrument correlations were calculated. As a test of criterion validity, the correlations between instrument scores and PVF symmetry scores were calculated. Additionally, internal consistency of all instruments was calculated and compared to those previously reported. Factor analysis is reported for the first time for LOAD, and is compared to that previously reported for CBPI and HCPI.

resultsSignificant moderate correlations were found between all instruments, implying construct validity for all instruments. Significant weak correlations were found between LOAD scores and PVF symmetry index, and between CBPI scores and PVF symmetry index. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LOAD is an owner-completed clinical metrology instrument that can be recommended for the measurement of canine osteoarthritis. It is convenient to use, validated and, as demonstrated here for the first time, has a correlation with force-platform data.

Indexed as

AnimalsDog DiseasesDogsFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleMaleOsteoarthritisPainPain MeasurementProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID23505459
PMCPMC3591443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.