ArticleJournal of chiropractic medicine2016
Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Multiple Linear Regression of the Neck Disability Index: Assessment If Subscales Are Equally Relevant in Whiplash and Nonspecific Neck Pain.
Article in Journal of chiropractic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A clinical test to assess isometric cervical strength in chronic whiplash associated disorder (WAD): a reliability study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBecause of previously published recommendations to modify the Neck Disability Index (NDI), we evaluated the responsiveness and dimensionality of the NDI within a population of adult whiplash-injured subjects. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the responsiveness and dimensionality of the NDI within a population of adult whiplash-injured subjects.
methodsSubjects who had sustained whiplash injuries of grade 2 or higher completed an NDI questionnaire. There were 123 subjects (55% female, of which 36% had recovered and 64% had chronic symptoms. NDI subscales were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis, considering only the subscales and, secondly, using sex as an 11th variable. The subscales were also tested with multiple linear regression modeling using the total score as a target variable.
resultsWhen considering only the 10 NDI subscales, only a single factor emerged, with an eigenvalue of 5.4, explaining 53.7% of the total variance. Strong correlation (> .55) (P < .0001) between all variables was found. Multiple linear regression modeling revealed high internal consistency with all coefficients reaching significance (P < .0001). The 4 NDI subscales exerting the greatest effect were, in decreasing order, Sleeping, Lifting, Headaches, and Pain Intensity.
conclusionA 2-factor model of the NDI is not justified based on our results, and in this population of whiplash subjects, the NDI was unidimensional, demonstrating high internal consistency and supporting the original validation study of Vernon and Mior.
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.