ArticleSpine surgery and related research2022
Psychometric Evaluation and External Validity of the Japanese Version of Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of lumbar stiffness disability index.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Long fusion surgery for adult spinal deformity may restrict activities of daily living due to lumbar stiffness. While the Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI) can help assess lumbar stiffness, in Asia the external validity of this questionnaire has not been sufficiently examined. We performed the psychometric evaluation and external validation of the Japanese version of the LSDI (LSDI-J). Methods: Fifty consecutive patients (14 males and 36 females; mean age 70.6 years) who underwent lumbar fusion surgery at our institution a minimum of one year after surgery and who visited the outpatient clinic between April and May 2019, were surveyed using the LSDI-J. The mean number of fusion levels was 4.4. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were calculated for internal consistency, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to evaluate reliability. External validity was assessed by comparisons with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), and the lumbar range of motion (LROM) with LSDI-J scores. Results: Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.652 overall, and 0.849 after excluding Question 10 due to a low response rate. The ICC was 0.824 overall and 0.851 after excluding Question 10. The correlation with the ODI was 0.684, and the correlation coefficients with each domain of the JOABPEQ ranged from -0.590 to -0.413, indicating moderate correlation. However, LROM and the LSDI-J were not correlated (r=-0.055, Conclusions: The LSDI-J may not be suitable in Japan because there was no correlation with LROM, the most important factor for external validity. It may be necessary to investigate why the LSDI-J did not apply to the Japanese population in terms of lower limb function. Alternatively, a unique method may be needed to assess lumbar stiffness disability that is more suitable for actual clinical practice in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.