Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24969159›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2015

Reference values for the SF-36 in Canadian injured workers undergoing rehabilitation.

Douglas P Gross, Fahad S Algarni, Riikka Niemeläinen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Education Makes the Difference: Work Preferences of Young Adults with Physical Disability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

3 authors.

Douglas P GrossDepartment of Physical Therapy, 2-50 Corbett Hall, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2G4, Canada, dgross@ualberta.ca.
Fahad S Algarni
Riikka Niemeläinen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36) is a widely used measure of health-related quality of life and normative reference values have been published for the general population of several countries. Since injured workers often experience pain, disability and other health challenges, we evaluated SF-36 reference values for Canadian workers' compensation claimants undergoing rehabilitation.

methodsDescriptive cross-sectional design. Data were gathered as part of a study aimed at developing a tool for selecting rehabilitation programs. Data were available on a wide variety of measures, including the SF-36. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted reference values, and stratified analyses based on type of rehabilitation, employment status and diagnostic group.

resultsData were available on 5,622 claimants undergoing rehabilitation. Claimants reported significant limitations on all SF-36 scales, but were especially limited on the Role Emotional and Bodily Pain scales (~3 standard deviations below typical Canadian norms). Unemployed, middle-aged claimants undergoing chronic pain programs reported the lowest health status, but SF-36 scores varied minimally across diagnoses.

conclusionsClaimant scores on the SF-36 were below population norms across all health scales and differed depending on age, employment status and type of rehabilitation. These data will be useful for assessing the health status of injured workers and evaluating the effect of rehabilitation interventions.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsCanadaDisability EvaluationEmploymentFemaleHealth StatusHumansMalePainQuality of LifeReference ValuesSex FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeWounds and Injuries

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.