Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27306539›Full record

Trial reportHealth and quality of life outcomes2016

Dynamic weight-bearing assessment of pain in knee osteoarthritis: construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability in a research setting.

Louise Klokker, Robin Christensen, Eva E Wæhrens, Elisabeth Bandak, Cecilie Bartholdy, Henning Bliddal, Marius Henriksen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Louise KlokkerThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark. Louise.Klokker.Madsen@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2463-0990
Robin ChristensenThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eva E WæhrensThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Elisabeth BandakThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Cecilie BartholdyThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Henning BliddalThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Marius HenriksenThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Frederiksberg Hospital · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) has suggested to asses pain after specific activities consistently in clinical trials on knee OA. The Dynamic weight-bearing Assessment of Pain (DAP) assesses pain during activity (30 s of performing repeated deep knee-bends from a standing position). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the DAP for knee osteoarthritis (OA).

methodsOne-hundred participants with knee OA were tested twice each with the DAP, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), six-minute-walk-test (6MWT), and 6-min-walk-test with subsequent pain rating (6MWTpain), and once with a transition questionnaire (TRANS-Q) for the patient-reported change in pain after 12 weeks of exercise. Construct validity (baseline-scores) and responsiveness (change-scores) were estimated by Spearman Correlation Coefficients. We hypothesized that no correlations would be excellent (<0.7) (divergent validity), except for the 6MWTpain (convergent validity). The TRANS-Q was used for interpreting the DAP change-scores in terms of responsiveness and Minimal Important Change (MIC).

resultsDivergent validity with the KOOS subscales (r = -0.31 to-0.45) and the 6MWT (r = -0.25) was supported. Convergent validity with the 6MWTpain was not supported (r = 0.54). The DAP change-scores corresponded to patient-reported change in pain (TRANS-Q), while correlations with change-scores on the other instruments were <0.35. The MIC was 2.4 DAP points.

conclusionsThe DAP possesses divergent validity compared to other instruments for knee OA, supporting the potential for this new way of assessing pain directly during activity. Importantly, the DAP change-scores correspond to patient-reported changes in pain, showing responsiveness. A change of 2.4 or more can be interpreted as clinically relevant. The DAP is a promising alternative to using 'pain on walking' as a clinical trial inclusion criterion/outcome.

Indexed as

AdultAgedExercise TestFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePainPain MeasurementQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and QuestionnairesWalkingWeight-BearingActivityKnee osteoarthritisOutcome measurePain

Identifiers

PMID27306539
PMCPMC4910227
OpenAlexW2438459556

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.