Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26499967›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2016

Development of a Modified Version of the Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): A Mixed Method Approach.

Svenja Janssen, Maurizio A Trippolini, Roger Hilfiker, Peter Oesch

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Svenja JanssenDepartment of Work Rehabilitation, Rehaklinik Bellikon, Suva Care, 5454, Bellikon, Switzerland. svenja.janssen@rehabellikon.ch.
Maurizio A TrippoliniDepartment of Work Rehabilitation, Rehaklinik Bellikon, Suva Care, 5454, Bellikon, Switzerland.
Roger HilfikerSchool of Health Sciences, HES-SO Valais-Wallis, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland Valais, Sion, Switzerland.
Peter OeschDepartment of Research, Rehabilitation Centre Valens, Valens, Switzerland.
Bellikon Rehabilitation Clinic · CHHES-SO Valais-Wallis · CHValens Clinics · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose To develop a modified version of the spinal function sort (M-SFS) by measuring work-related self-efficacy beliefs in patients with chronic low back pain. Methods A mixed method design consisting of three different methods (M1-3) was performed. In semi-structured interviews participants were asked how often they performed the activities of the 50 SFS items in 1 week, and which spinal postures and movements were associated with their back pain (M1). Quantitative analysis of previously obtained SFS data investigated internal consistency, unidimensionality, item response, and floor and ceiling effect (M2). Experts rated the SFS items based on their relevance (M3). The findings from these methods were used within a final scoring system for item reduction. Results From semi-structured interviews with 17 participants, eight new items emerged (M1). Quantitative analysis of 565 data sets (M2) revealed very high internal consistency of all items (Cronbach's alpha = 0.98) indicating item redundancy; unidimensionality of the SFS was supported by principal component analysis; good item response was confirmed by Rasch analysis; and a floor effect of four items depicting very heavy material handling was found. Experts agreed on 8 out of the 50 SFS as relevant (M3). From the original SFS, 12 items met the predefined summary score of 9. Conclusions A modified version of the SFS with 20 items has been developed. Feasibility, reliability and validity of this modified version must be tested before it can be used in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Work Capacity EvaluationAdultChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalLow Back PainMaleOccupationsSelf EfficacySurveys and QuestionnairesBack painQuestionnaireSelf-efficacy beliefsWork

Identifiers

PMID26499967
PMCPMC4967421
OpenAlexW1878512462

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.