Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27356516›Full record

Observational studyEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2016

Responsiveness of the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia in Italian subjects with chronic low back pain undergoing motor and cognitive rehabilitation.

Marco Monticone, Emilia Ambrosini, Barbara Rocca, Calogero Foti, Simona Ferrante

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. To evaluate responsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) for the Persian versions of FABQ, TSK, and PCS.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Marco MonticoneDepartment of Public Health, Clinical and Molecular Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria, Strada Statale, 554-Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy. marco.monticone@unica.it.
Emilia AmbrosiniNeuroengineering and Medical Robotics Laboratory, Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Barbara RoccaPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, Scientific Institute of Lissone, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Institute of Care and Research (IRCCS), Lissone, Italy.
Calogero FotiUniversity of Rome 'Torvergata', Rome, Italy.
Simona FerranteNeuroengineering and Medical Robotics Laboratory, Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Politecnico di Milano · ITFondazione Salvatore Maugeri · ITUniversity of Cagliari · ITUniversity of Rome Tor Vergata · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) is a commonly used measure for the assessment of kinesiophobia related to spinal diseases. The Italian version showed satisfactory psychometric properties, but its responsiveness has not yet been evaluated. This observational study is aimed at evaluating the responsiveness and minimal important changes (MICs) for the TSK in subjects with chronic low back pain.

methodsAt the beginning and end of an 8-week multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme, 205 patients completed the TSK. After the programme, patients also completed the global perceived effect (GPE) scale, which was divided to produce a dichotomous outcome. Responsiveness was calculated by distribution [effect size (ES); standardised response mean (SRM)] and anchor-based methods [receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves; correlations between change scores of the TSK and GPE]. ROC curves were also used to compute the best cut-off levels between subjects with a "good" or "poor" outcome (MICs).

resultsThe ES and the SRM were 1.49 and 1.36, respectively. The ROC analyses revealed a MIC value (AUC; sensitivity; specificity) of 5.5 (0.996; 95; 97). To avoid any dependence on the baseline scores, the MIC value [area under the curve (AUC); sensitivity; and specificity] was computed also based on the percentage of change from the baseline and a value of 18 % (0.998; 97; 98 %) was obtained. The correlation between change scores of the TSK and GPE was high (0.871).

conclusionsThe TSK was sensitive in detecting clinical changes in subjects with chronic low back pain. We recommend taking the MICs provided into account when assessing patients' improvement or planning studies in this clinical context.

Indexed as

AdultAgedChronic DiseaseCognitive Behavioral TherapyDisability EvaluationExercise TherapyFemaleHumansItalyLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePain MeasurementPhobic DisordersPsychometricsChronic low back painKinesiophobiaMinimal important changesResponsivenessTSK

Identifiers

PMID27356516
OpenAlexW2461885327

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.