Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32519053›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2021

Measurement properties of Pain Catastrophizing Scale in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Wei Jie Ong, Yu Heng Kwan, Zhui Ying Lim, Julian Thumboo, Seng Jin Yeo, William Yeo, Steven B Wong, Ying Ying Leung

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

8 authors.

Wei Jie OngDepartment of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8244-2977
Yu Heng KwanDepartment of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7802-9696
Zhui Ying LimDepartment of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
Julian ThumbooDepartment of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
Seng Jin YeoDepartment of Orthopedics, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
William YeoDepartment of Orthopedics, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Steven B WongDepartment of Radiology, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Ying Ying LeungDepartment of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore. katyccc@hotmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8492-6342

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPain catastrophizing impacts symptoms and outcomes for knee osteoarthritis (OA). We evaluated the internal consistency, content, construct and structure validity of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) in patients with knee OA.

methodsWe evaluated content validity of PCS via cognitive interviews. We then recruited patients with knee OA enlisted for knee replacement (KR) surgery in a Singapore tertiary referral hospital for cross-sectional validation evaluation of PCS. Data was collected 2 weeks prior to KR. Analyses was guided by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) framework for internal consistency, construct validity and structure validity.

resultsAdequate content validity was confirmed from 10 patients in cognitive interviews. 675 (70.4% female, mean (standard deviation, SD) age = 65.52 (6.84) years) were included (91.7% total KR, 8.3% unicompartmental KR) in the cross-sectional study. The mean (SD) PCS score was 12.65 (10.55), with 0.14% and 8.63% ceiling and floor effects, respectively. PCS demonstrates high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.94). Construct validity was demonstrated by fulfilment of seven out of seven (100%) a priori hypotheses. PCS was strongly correlated with anxiety and depression, and moderately correlated with physical functioning and mental health domains of the short form 36 health survey (SF-36). Sensitivity analyses between Chinese and non-Chinese subgroups are generally consistent. From confirmatory factor analysis, the PCS model showed good fit for a second-order, three-factor structure (CFI = 0.965, TLI = 0.950, SRMR = 0.031).

conclusionsThis study supports internal consistency, construct validity and structural validity of PCS as a measure of pain catastrophizing in knee OA patients. Key points • The PCS is validated for measuring pain catastrophizing in knee OA patients, for evaluation of possible link to post-KR surgery satisfaction outcomes and other purposes.

Indexed as

Osteoarthritis, KneeAgedCatastrophizationCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSingaporeSurveys and QuestionnairesKnee osteoarthritisPain catastrophizing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.