ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2020
Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Patient-Specific Functional Scale in patients with chronic neck pain
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06767839 (The Effect of Different Electrotherapy Interventions on Pain and Hand Function in Young Individuals With Neck Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
The Effect of Different Electrotherapy Interventions on Pain and Hand Function in Young Individuals With Neck Pain: a Randomized Controlled Double-blind Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2025Article
- Reliability, Measurement Error, Responsiveness, and Minimal Important Change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale 2.0 for Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain.Physical therapy · 2024Article
- Measurement Properties' Evaluation of the Arabic Version of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Current clinical guidelines recommend to use both clinical and self-reported measurements for evaluation of chronic neck pain. Among the self-reported outcomes, Neck disability index and patient-specific functional scale are the most widely used and recommended instruments. The purpose of our study was to determine the test-retest reliability and validity of patient-specific functional scale which was not validated in Turkish language previously. Materials and methods: Translation and adaptation process had conducted according to the Beaton et al. Sociodemographic data, Turkish version of patient-specific functional scale and neck disability index were recorded at the initial assessment. Retest assessment was produced for reliability analyses and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC3,2) was determined. The correlations between patient- specific functional scale and neck disability index and hypothesis testing were examined for the convergent and construct validity analysis. Results: The final form was completed by 110 chronic neck pain patients (Male: 33; mean ages: 43.13 ± 13.75 years, Female: 77; mean ages: 44.45 ± 14.38). Test-retest reliability of patient-specific functional scale was found good level (ICC: 0.85). The relationship between patient-specific functional scale and neck disability index was found moderate level (P < 0.05, rho: –0.578). The median score of PSFS-T in the low disability group was significantly higher than the high disability group in the hypothesis testing of construct validity (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the patient-specific functional scale is a valid and reliable scale for evaluating functional status in patients with chronic neck pain.
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.