ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2018
Measurement Properties of the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): Is It Reliable and Valid in Workers with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain?
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive diagnostic service to clarify intervention needs when work participation is at risk: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (GIBI, DRKS00027577).BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Matching Perceived Physical Capacity and Work Demands: A New Classification of the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS).Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Determination of Perceived Levels of Physical Work Demand Thresholds, and Reliability and Responsiveness of the Modified-Spinal Function Sort Questionnaire in a Multidisciplinary Occupational Rehabilitation Setting.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Multidisciplinary programme for rehabilitation of chronic low back pain - factors predicting successful return to work.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To analyze the reliability and validity of a picture-based questionnaire, the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS). Methods Sixty-two injured workers with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) were recruited from two work rehabilitation centers. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was tested based on four a priori hypotheses. Structural validity was measured with principal component analysis (PCA). Test-retest reliability and agreement was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and measurement error with the limits of agreement (LoA). Results Total score of the M-SFS was 54.4 (SD 16.4) and 56.1 (16.4) for test and retest, respectively. Item distribution showed no ceiling effects. Cronbach's alpha was 0.94 and 0.95 for test and retest, respectively. PCA showed the presence of four components explaining a total of 74% of the variance. Item communalities were >0.6 in 17 out of 20 items. ICC was 0.90, LoA was ±12.6/16.2 points. The correlations between the M-SFS were 0.89 with the original SFS, 0.49 with the Pain Disability Index, -0.37 and -0.33 with the Numeric Rating Scale for actual pain, -0.52 for selfreported disability due to chronic low back pain, and 0.50, 0.56-0.59 with three distinct lifting tests. No a priori defined hypothesis for construct validity was rejected. Conclusions The M-SFS allows reliable and valid assessment of perceived self-efficacy for work-related tasks and can be recommended for use in patients with chronic MSD. Further research should investigate the proposed M-SFS score of <56 for its predictive validity for non-return to work.
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.