Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32577114›Full record

ArticleThe Iowa orthopaedic journal2019

Oswestry Disability Index: Is Telephone Administration Valid?

Christopher T Martin, Alexandra K Yaszemski, Charles G T Ledonio, Tara C Barrack, David W Polly

Open access · greenAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Iowa orthopaedic journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher T MartinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Alexandra K YaszemskiUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD.
Charles G T LedonioInnovative Surgical Designs, Inc., Wayne, PA.
Tara C BarrackSummit Orthopedics, Woodbury, MN.
David W PollyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
University of Minnesota · USSummit School · USUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is among the most widely used patient reported outcome measures for the assessment of spinal conditions. Traditionally, the ODI has been administered in outpatient clinics on a face-to-face basis, which can be expensive and time consuming. Furthermore, the percentage of patients lost to clinical follow-up is high, particularly after 2-5 years. Thus, telephonic administration of the ODI, if valid, could be a convenient way of capturing patient outcomes and increasing follow-up rates. The objective of this study was to validate telephonic administration of the ODI compared to face-to-face administration. Methods: A convenience sample of individuals with and without back pain in an academic medical center were recruited for this study. Face-to-face administration of the ODI was completed and retested 24 hours later via phone. Test-retest reliability was determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: 22 individuals completed the ODI questionnaire face-to-face, then via telephone 24 hours later. There was a mean 2% (± 3) intra-rater ODI score difference (range: 0% to 12%). The intraclass correlation coefficient overall was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99, p<0.001) with a range of 0.95 to 1.0, revealing near-perfect test-retest reliability. Conclusions: Administration of the ODI questionnaire over the phone has excellent test-retest reliability when compared to face-to-face administration. Telephone administration is a convenient and reliable option for obtaining follow-up outcomes data. Clinical Relevance: Telephonic administration of the ODI is scientifically valid, and should be an accepted method of data collection for state-level and national-level outcomes projects.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationTelephoneAdultBack PainFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSpinal DiseasesSurveys and Questionnairesassessmentdisabilitylow back painODIOswestry Disability Indexoutcomesquality of lifequestionnairespinetelephonevalidation

Identifiers

PMID32577114
PMCPMC7047302
OpenAlexW3037627306

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.