ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021
Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma).
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Italian Spine Trauma Registry: design and rationale of a prospective nationwide multicenter study on surgically treated spinal trauma.Spinal cord · 2026Observational
- Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Long-Term Prospective Validation of the AO Spine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma).Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Validating Patient-Reported Outcomes and Surveys in Other Languages.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Correlation of patient reported outcomes among patients with chronic low back pain and controls.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Reliability and validity of the Finnish version of the AO spine PROST (patient reported outcome spine trauma).Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Reliability and Validity of the German Version of the AO Spine Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma Questionnaire.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Does Erector Spinae Plane Block Decrease Analgesia Requirements After Minimal-Invasive Posterior Transpedicular Stabilization in Patients With Vertebral Body Fracture? A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Study.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Validation of the AO Spine CROST (Clinician Reported Outcome Spine Trauma) in the clinical setting.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Article
- Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review.Brain & spine · 2024Review
- A disease-specific patient reported outcome instrument for spine trauma is developed, validated and available! Re: Andrzejowski et al. Measuring functional outcomes in major trauma: can we do better?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo validate the Dutch version of AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma).
methodsPatients were recruited from two level-1 trauma centers from the Netherlands. Next to the AOSpine PROST, patients also filled out SF-36 for concurrent validity. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the characteristics. Content validity was assessed by evaluating the number of inapplicable or missing questions. Also floor and ceiling effects were analyzed. Internal consistency was assessed by calculating Cronbach's α and item-total correlation coefficients (itcc). Spearman correlation tests were performed within AOSpine PROST items and in correlation with SF-36. Test-retest reliability was analyzed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC). Responsiveness was assessed by calculating effect sizes (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Factor analysis was performed to explore any dimensions within AOSpine PROST.
resultsOut of 179 enrolled patients, 163 (91.1%) were included. Good results were obtained for content validity. No floor or ceiling effects were seen. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.96, itcc 0.50-0.86), with also good Spearman correlations (0.25-0.79). Compared to SF-36, the strongest correlation was seen for physical functioning (0.79; p < .001). Also test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.92). Concerning responsiveness analysis, very good results were seen with ES = 1.81 and SRM = 2.03 (p < 0.001). Factor analysis revealed two possible dimensions (Eigenvalues > 1), explaining 65.4% of variance.
conclusionsVery satisfactory results were obtained for reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of AOSpine PROST. Treating surgeons are encouraged to use this novel and validated tool in clinical setting and research to contribute to evidence-based and patient-centered care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32815075What 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.