Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31772112›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2019

Psychometric properties of the global rating of change scales in patients with neck disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Pavlos Bobos, Joy MacDermid, Goris Nazari, Rochelle Furtado, CATWAD

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Massage for neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Pavlos BobosWestern's Bone and Joint Institute, School of Physical Physical Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada pbobos@uwo.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-5098-4840
Joy MacDermidWestern's Bone and Joint Institute, School of Physical Physical Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Goris NazariWestern's Bone and Joint Institute, School of Physical Physical Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Rochelle FurtadoWestern's Bone and Joint Institute, School of Physical Physical Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
CATWAD

Funding

CIHR FRN: SCA-145102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this systematic review was to critically appraise and synthesise the psychometric properties of Global Rating of Change (GROC) scales for assessment of patients with neck pain.

designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: A search was performed in four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS) until February 2019. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Eligible articles were appraised using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist and the Quality Appraisal for Clinical Measurement Research Reports Evaluation Form.

resultsThe search obtained 16 eligible studies and included in total 1533 patients with neck pain. Test-retest reliability of global perceived effect (GPE) was very high (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.80 to 0.92) for patients with whiplash. Pooled data of Pearson's r indicated that GROC scores were moderately correlated with neck disability change scores (0.53, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.59). Pooled data of Spearman's correlations indicated that GROC scores were moderately correlated with neck disability change scores (0.56, 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.68).

conclusionsThis study found excellent quality evidence of very good-to-excellent test-retest reliability of GPE for patients with whiplash-associated disorders. Evidence from very good-to-excellent quality studies found that GROC scores are moderately correlated to an external criterion patient-reported outcome measure evaluated pre-post treatment in patients with neck pain. No studies were found that addressed the optimal form of GROC scales for patients with neck disorders or compared the GROC to other options for single-item global assessment. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018117874.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresPsychometricsAge FactorsDisability EvaluationEvidence-Based MedicineHumansNeck Painglobal assessmentneck painpsychometric propertiessystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31772112
PMCPMC6886942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.