ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2020
A quality of life questionnaire for patients with scapula alata (SA-Q): development and validation.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNo quality of life (QoL) questionnaire exists for patients with scapula alata (SA). The objective of this study was to develop and validate a QoL questionnaire for SA patients.
methodsA team consisting of experts (n = 7) and SA patients (n = 7) developed, through five continuous phases, a QoL questionnaire for SA patients (SA-Q). The developed questionnaire consists of 21 items, grouped in five domains: physical symptoms (five items), work (four items), sport and leisure activities (four items), life style (four items) and emotions (four items). Content and face validity for the SA-Q questionnaire were evaluated by a sample of 48 (90%) out of 53 SA patients recruited from a university hospital. The Content Validity Index (CVI) and modified kappa index (κ*) assessed the relevance of SA-Q questionnaire.
resultsThe SA patients evaluated 20 (95%) out of 21 items as excellent for content validity (I-CVI > 0.78, κ* > 0.74), one (5%) item was considered as good (I-CVI < 0.78, 0.60 < κ* < 0.74). The average scale (S-CVI/ave) for the entire SA-Q questionnaire was 0.93 indicating an excellent content validity.
conclusionsThis study presents the development and validation of content validity of the first QoL questionnaire for SA patients. The SA-Q questionnaire has potential clinical implications for detected changes concerning the different items during rehabilitation. CLINICAL TRIALS: Not relevant.
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.