Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29340198›Full record

ArticleArchives of physiotherapy2017

Content validity and test-retest reliability of a low back pain questionnaire in Zimbabwean adolescents.

Matthew Chiwaridzo, Tafadzwa Nicole Chikasha, Nirmala Naidoo, Jermaine Matewu Dambi, Cathrine Tadyanemhandu, Nyaradzai Munambah, Precious Trish Chizanga

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physiotherapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew ChiwaridzoRehabilitation Department, University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences, P.O Box A178, Avondale, Harare Zimbabwe.
Tafadzwa Nicole ChikashaRehabilitation Department, University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences, P.O Box A178, Avondale, Harare Zimbabwe.
Nirmala NaidooDivision of Physiotherapy, University of Cape Town, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Cape Town, South Africa.
Jermaine Matewu DambiRehabilitation Department, University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences, P.O Box A178, Avondale, Harare Zimbabwe.
Cathrine TadyanemhanduRehabilitation Department, University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences, P.O Box A178, Avondale, Harare Zimbabwe.
Nyaradzai MunambahRehabilitation Department, University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences, P.O Box A178, Avondale, Harare Zimbabwe.
Precious Trish ChizangaDepartment of Tourism and Hospitality, Harare Polytechnic College, P.O Box CY 407, Causeway, Harare Zimbabwe.
University of Zimbabwe · ZWHarare Institute of Technology · ZWUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Zimbabwe, a recent increase in the volume of research on recurrent non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) has revealed that adolescents are commonly affected. This is alarming to health professionals and parents and calls for serious primary preventative strategies to be developed and implemented forthwith. Early identification initiatives should be prioritised in order to curtail the condition and its progression. In an attempt to be proactive in minimising the prevalence of recurrent NSLBP, this study was conducted to evaluate the content validity and test-retest reliability of a survey questionnaire with the aim of proffering a valid and reliable questionnaire which can be used in non-clinical settings to identify adolescents with recurrent NSLBP in Harare, Zimbabwe and determine the possible factors associated with the condition.

methodsThe study was conducted in two parts. The first part assessed content validity of the questionnaire using four experts derived from academia and clinical practice. The second part evaluated the reliability of the questionnaire among 125 high school-children aged between 13 and 19 years in a test-retest study.

resultsTwenty-six (26) out of thirty questions in the questionnaire had an Item Content Validity index of 1.00, demonstrating complete agreement among content experts. Overall, the Scale Content Validity Index for the questionnaire was 0.97. Item completion for the reliability study was satisfactory. The questionnaire items had kappa values ranging from 0.17 (slight agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement). High levels of reliability were found for the questions on school bag use (

conclusionExcellent content validity and slight to perfect test-retest reliability was found for the Low Back Pain (LBP) questionnaire. These results are comparable to findings of other studies evaluating the psychometric properties of LBP questionnaires. Cognisant of the limitations of the study, the results of this study suggest that the LBP questionnaire could be used in local studies investigating LBP among adolescents although questions enquiring on functional limitations and sciatica may need further consideration.

Indexed as

AdolescentsContent ValidityLow Back PainTest-retest reliabilityZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID29340198
PMCPMC5759913
OpenAlexW2592391366

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.