ArticleSpinal cord2020
The reliability and validity of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic Data set in people with spinal cord injuries from a middle-income country: a psychometric study of the Thai version.
Article in Spinal cord, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reciprocal association between pain and quality of life after newly acquired spinal cord injury.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Responsiveness of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic Data Set V2.0: An international longitudinal study.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2023Article
- Longitudinal measurement invariance of the international spinal cord injury quality of life basic data set (SCI-QoL-BDS) during spinal cord injury/disorder inpatient rehabilitation.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Internal consistency and convergent validity of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic Data Set at discharge from first rehabilitation.Spinal cord · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA cross-sectional study.
objectivesTo examine psychometric properties, including internal consistency, construct validity, and test-retest reliability, of the Thai version of the International Spinal Cord Injury (ISCI) Quality of Life Basic Data Set (QoL-BDS).
settingOutpatient rehabilitation clinic, urodynamic clinic, and rehabilitation ward at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital.
methodsParticipants were assigned to complete two assessment tools, the Thai version of QoL-BDS which consisted of three single items on satisfaction with life as a whole, physical health and psychological health, and the Thai version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) completed by face to face interview. After 2 weeks, the participants were evaluated the QoL-BDS again via telephone interviewing to assess test-retest reliability.
resultsOne hundred and thirty people with spinal cord injury (SCI) were included in the study. Of all participants, 103 people had a traumatic SCI. The mean (SD) age was 43.0 (13.1) years and the median (IQR) time after SCI was 7.5 (1-14) years. The Thai version of QoL-BDS had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89), fair to good construct validity (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient of 0.43-0.57, p < 0.01) and good to excellent test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.73-0.86).
conclusionsThe Thai version of QoL-BDS had acceptable psychometric properties. As it is concise, QoL-BDS should be encouraged in healthcare providers to investigate QoL in people with SCI, especially in middle-income countries.
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.