Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36247389›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2021

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Dutch version of the Core Outcome Measures Index for the back (COMI -back) in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine.

Pravesh S Gadjradj, Mehrman Chalaki, Maurits W van Tulder, Biswadjiet S Harhangi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. How reliable are the Core Outcome Measures Index and Global Treatment Outcome as measures of treatment success after surgery for central lumbar spinal canal stenosis?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 · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Pravesh S GadjradjDepartment of Neurosurgery, Park MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Mehrman ChalakiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Park MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Maurits W van TulderDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Movement Sciences Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Biswadjiet S HarhangiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Park MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLNewYork–Presbyterian Hospital · USVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the preferred outcomes measured in patients with lumbar spinal degenerative diseases. As PROMs can be lengthy and therefore pose a burden to patients and researchers, short and standardized PROMs are needed, such as the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI). Research question: Is the Dutch version of the COMI-back a reliable and responsive PROM to measure outcomes in lumbar degenerative spinal surgery? Methods: After translating and cross-cultural adapting the COMI-back into Dutch, patients who were on the waiting-list for lumbar decompression surgery in a secondary referral center, were enrolled in the validation study. Patients completed a baseline booklet consisting of the COMI-back, likert scales measuring back and leg pain, the Roland-Morris Disability questionnaire, the EuroQoL-5 dimensions and the WHO-Quality-of-Life-BREF questionnaire to test construct validity. Within 2 weeks and before undergoing surgery, patients completed the COMI-back again, to measure test-retest stability. Three months after surgery, a global treatment outcome (GTO) question and the COMI-back were completed to test responsiveness. Results: The COMI-back was successfully translated and adapted into Dutch. One-hundred-thirty-five patients completed the baseline booklet, 93 the test-retest questionnaire and 102 the responsiveness questionnaire. The COMI-summary score and four of five COMI-domains, showed good to very good correlation to the reference questionnaires (ρ ​> ​0.41). The COMI-back showed a good test-retest stability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81 for the summary score. Furthermore, the standard error of agreement was 0.65 and the minimal detectable change was 1.8 points. The ROC-curve showed an area under the curve of 0.89 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.95). Conclusion: The Dutch version of the COMI-back has satisfactory psychometric properties and is a reliable and responsive patient-reported outcome measure in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.

Indexed as

COMI, Core Outcomes Measures IndexCore outcomes measurement indexDutchEQ5D, EuroQol-5 dimensionsICC, Intraclass correlation coefficientLow back painMDC, Minimum detectable changePatient reported outcome measurePROM, Patient-reported outcome measureRMDQ, Roland-Morris Disability QuestionnaireROC, Receiver-operating characteristicSEM, Standard errors of measurement agreementSRM, Standardized response meanValidationWHOQoL-BREF, World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID36247389
PMCPMC9560685
OpenAlexW3193755445

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.