ArticlePloS one2016
Psychometric Assessment of the Japanese Version of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ): Reliability and Validity.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment-based classification for low back pain: systematic review with meta-analysis.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Do postoperative changes in physical function affect patient-reported outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing rehabilitation? A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.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 · 2026Trial
- The MOTION Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Objective Real-World Outcomes for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients Treated with the mild® Procedure: One-Year Results.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2022Trial
- A comparative study of three conservative treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: lumbar spinal stenosis with acupuncture and physical therapy study (LAP study).BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2018Trial
- Upright MRI Follow-Up for Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization in Low-Grade L4/L5 Spondylolisthesis Suggests Reduced Reoperation Rates Compared With Fusion or Decompression Alone.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Calculation of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) using different methodologies: case study and practical guide.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 · 2024Article
- Evaluation and Rehabilitation after Adult Lumbar Spine Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Neuropathic Pain Was Associated with Central Sensitivity Syndrome in Patients with Preoperative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Using the painDETECT and Central Sensitization Inventory Questionnaires: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pain research & management · 2023Article
- Responsiveness of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Index, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire, the 8-Item Short Form Health Survey, and the Euroqol 5 dimensions 5 level in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.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 · 2022Article
- Psychological Predictors of Satisfaction after Lumbar Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- A Differential Clinical Benefit Examination of Full Lumbar Endoscopy vs Interspinous Process Spacers in the Treatment of Spinal Stenosis: An Effect Size Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Best Practices for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment 2.0 (MIST): Consensus Guidance from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN).Journal of pain research · 2022Review
- Translation and Validation of the Danish Version of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire.Global spine journal · 2022Article
- Psychological Distress Associated with Patient-Reported Outcomes in Preoperative Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Asian spine journal · 2021Article
- Construct validity and responsiveness of commonly used patient reported outcome instruments in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Article
- Wide Variability in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures After Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review.Global spine journal · 2020Review
- Dynamic Changes of Cauda Equina Motion Before and After Decompressive Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Redundant Nerve Roots: Cauda Equina Activation Sign.Global spine journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) is a self-administered measure to evaluate symptom severity, physical function, and surgery satisfaction in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The purpose of this study is to assess the psychometric properties of the Japanese ZCQ in LSS patients.
methodsLSS patients who are scheduled to undergo surgery were recruited from 12 facilities. Responses to several questionnaires, including the Japanese ZCQ; the visual analogue scale (VAS) to evaluate the degree of pain in the buttocks/legs, numbness in the buttocks/legs, and low back pain; the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); and the SF-36v2, were collected before surgery and again 3 months after surgery (the post-surgery ZCQ was administered twice for test-retest reliability). For reliability, test-retest reliability was evaluated using the intra-class coefficient (ICC) and internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Concurrent validity was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficients between the Japanese ZCQ and other questionnaires. Effect size (ES) and standard response mean were calculated for responsiveness. All analyses were performed individually for the Japanese ZCQ symptom, function, and satisfaction domains.
resultsData from 180 LSS patients were used in this analysis. The ICCs were 0.81, 0.89, and 0.88 and Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.78, 0.84, and 0.92 for the Japanese ZCQ symptom, function, and satisfaction domains, respectively. Regarding the concurrent validity, strong correlations (±0.5) were demonstrated between the Japanese ZCQ domains and the VAS leg pain, ODI, and SF-36v2 physical functioning or bodily pain, whereas correlations were approximately 0.3 in scales measuring other symptoms that are less related to symptom, function, or satisfaction domains. ESs showed high values for the ZCQ symptom and function domains (-1.73 for both).
conclusionsThese psychometric assessments demonstrate that the Japanese ZCQ is a psychometrically reliable and valid measure in LSS. The Japanese ZCQ can evaluate both multi-dimensional aspects and the level of surgery satisfaction.
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.