ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2020
Body awareness and chronic low back pain: validity and reliability study of Turkish version of body awareness rating scale
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. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exercise Participation and Clinical Characteristics of Desk-Based Workers with Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain Exposed to Increased Ergonomic Risk: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Evaluating Body Awareness: A Systematic Review Using the COSMIN Methodology.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Previous studies reported that patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) had trouble describing senses or body functions. A questionnaire, the body awareness rating questionnaire (BARQ), was recently developed for assessing body awareness. The aim of the study was to develop a Turkish version of the BARQ and investigate the validity and reliability in patients with CLBP. Materials and methods: BARQ translated to Turkish with forward-backward method. Ninety-nine patients with CLBP and 101 healthy controls (HC) completed the BARQ-T. Fifty-one of patients with CLBP and HC repeated BARQ-T 3 days later. In addition to BARQ-T, Oswestry disability index (ODI), pain severity, short form 36 (SF-36) and Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS) were administered. Results: The current study found good-excellent Cronbach’s alpha values for patients with CLBP (α: between 0.883–0.967) and acceptable-good Cronbach’s alpha values for HC (α: between 0.649–0.825) in factors of BARQ-T. ICC values for test-retest validity were found to be good-excellent for patients with CLBP in all factors. BARQ-T was positively correlated with SF-36 and negatively correlated with ODI and TAS (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The study confirmed that the BARQ-T has acceptable validation and reliability in terms of pain perception and pain assessment in the Turkish CLBP community.
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.