ArticleBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Health professionals identify components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in questionnaires for the upper limb.
Article in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Necessity of Immobilizing the Metacarpophalangeal Joint in Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: Short-term Effect.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2018Trial
- Identification of intervention categories for aquatic physical therapy in pediatrics using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Children and Youth: a global expert survey.Brazilian journal of physical therapyArticle
- Identification of relevant categories for inpatient physical therapy care using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: a Brazilian survey.Brazilian journal of physical therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral Brazilian studies have addressed the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), but few have analyzed the knowledge of the health professionals with regards to the ICF.
objectiveTo verify whether the classification of the items in the Brazilian-Portuguese versions of The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and The Disabilities Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires, obtained from health professionals who worked with patients having upper limb injuries, could be related to ICF components as defined by others studies.
methodThere were 4 participants for the group "professionals with high familiarity of the ICF (PHF)" and 19 for the group of "professionals with some or no familiarity of the ICF (PSNF)". The participants judged whether the items on the two questionnaires belonged to the ICF body function, body structure or activity-participation component, and marked a confidence level for each trial using a numerical scale ranging from zero to 10. The items were classified by the discriminant content validity method using the Student'st-test and the Hochberg correction. The ratings were compared to the literature by the percentage of agreement and Kappa coefficient.
resultsThe percentage of agreement of the rating from the PSNF and the PHF groups with the literature was equal to or greater than 77%. For the DASH, the agreement of the PSNF and PHF groups with the literature were, respectively, moderate (Kappa=0.46 to 0.48) and substantial (Kappa=0.62 to 0.70).
conclusionsHealth professionals were able to correlate the three components of the ICF for most items on the 2 questionnaires, demonstrating some ease of understanding the ICF components. However, the relation of concept of pain with body function component is not clear for professional and deserves a more attentive approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.