Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34563005›Full record

ArticleClinics and practice2021

Assessment of Central Sensitization in Breast Cancer Survivors: Convergent Validity and Use of the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) and Its Short-Form as a Clustering Tool.

Alban Hurth, Jessica Nijzink-Ter Steege, Pauline Scheepbouwer, Eva Roose, Astrid Lahousse, Laurence Leysen, Lara Stas, Jeroen Kregel, Eric Salvat, Jo Nijs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Alban HurthPain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1917-7768
Jessica Nijzink-Ter SteegePain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.
Pauline ScheepbouwerPain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.
Eva RoosePain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8720-6543
Astrid LahoussePain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3967-8348
Laurence LeysenPain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.
Lara StasInterfaculty Center for Data Processing and Statistics, Core Facility, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1567-2881
Jeroen KregelBreederode Hogeschool, 3011 Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Eric SalvatCentre d'Evaluation et de Traitement de la Douleur, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
Jo NijsPain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4976-6563
Vrije Universiteit Brussel · BEInstitut des Neurosciences Cellulaires et Intégratives · FRRotterdam University of Applied Sciences · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) measurement properties in patients having nonspecific, noncancer pain are well-established. However, studies examining the reliability and validity of either the CSI or the Central Sensitization Inventory short-form version (CSI-9) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) are scarce. The purpose was to evaluate convergent validity and internal consistency of the CSI and CSI-9. Additionally, the relevance of a new cluster calculator using the CSI was explored. The cross-sectional multi-center study included 65 BCS and 37 healthy volunteers. Patients filled out multiple questionnaires assessing pain, number of painful areas, anxiety, depression and quality of life. The relevance of a cluster calculator was explored by known-group comparisons and boxplot description. All hypotheses were formulated before data analysis. The majority of hypotheses on the correlations between the CSI or CSI-9 and other health outcomes were confirmed (22 out of 27). The CSI and CSI-9 have excellent (α = 0.92) and good (α = 0.86) internal consistency, respectively. The CSI cluster calculator might be an interesting tool to use to have a patient's overall condition snapshot. Generally, the study findings support the construct validity and internal consistency of the CSI, which underline the use of this self-reported instrument in BCS. The CSI-9 shows promising results, but should be further evaluated.

Indexed as

breast cancercancer survivorscentral sensitivity syndromecentral sensitizationcentral sensitization inventorychronic pain

Identifiers

PMID34563005
PMCPMC8482070
OpenAlexW3197173242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.