Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38532353›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024

Developing a shortened spine functional index (SFI-10) for patients with sub-acute/chronic spinal disorders: a cross-sectional study.

Charles Philip Gabel, Antonio Cuesta-Vargas, Almir Vieira Dibai-Filho, Hamid Reza Mokhtarinia, Markus Melloh, Agnieszka Bejer

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Charles Philip GabelAccess Physiotherapy, PO Box 760, Coolum Beach, Queensland, 4573, Australia.
Antonio Cuesta-VargasDepartment of Psychiatry and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Malaga University, Malaga, Spain.
Almir Vieira Dibai-FilhoFederal University of Maranhao, Sao Luis, Maranhao, Brazil.
Hamid Reza MokhtariniaDepartment of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran. hrmokhtarinia@yahoo.com.
Markus MellohQueensland University of Technology, School of Public Health and Social Work, Brisbane, Australia.
Agnieszka BejerInstitute of Health Sciences, Medical College, Rzeszow University, Rzeszow, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrief whole-spine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide regional solutions and future directions for quantifying functional status, evidence, and effective interventions. The whole-spine regional Spine Functional Index (SFI-25) is used internationally in clinical and scientific contexts to assess general sub-acute/chronic spine populations. However, to improve structural validity and practicality a shortened version is recommended. This study developed a shortened-SFI from the determined optimal number of item questions that: correlated with criteria PROMs being highly with whole-spine, moderately with regional-spine, condition-specific and patient-specific, and moderately-low with general-health and pain; retained one-dimensional structural validity and high internal consistency; and improved practicality to reduce administrative burden.

methodsA cross-sectional study (n = 505, age = 18-87 yrs., average = 40.3 ± 10.1 yrs) of sub-acute/chronic spine physiotherapy outpatients from an international sample of convenience. Three shortened versions of the original SFI-25 were developed using 1) qualitative 'content-retention' methodology, 2) quantitative 'factorial' methodology, and 3) quantitative 'Rasch' methodology, with a fourth 'random' version produced as a comparative control. The clinimetric properties were established for structural validity with exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factorial analysis, and Rasch analysis. Criterion validity used the: whole-spine SFI-25 and Functional Rating Index (FRI); regional-spine Neck Disability Index (NDI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ), condition-specific Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (WDQ); and patient-specific functional scale (PSFS); and determined floor/ceiling effect. A post-hoc pooled international sub-acute/chronic spine sample (n = 1433, age = 18-91 yrs., average = 42.0 ± 15.7 yrs) clarified the findings and employed the general-health EuroQuol-Index (EQ-5D), and 11-point Pain Numerical Rating Scale (P-NRS) criteria.

resultsA 10-item SFI retained structural validity with optimal practicality requiring no computational aid. The SFI-10 concept-retention-version demonstrated preferred criterion validity with whole-spine criteria (SFI-25 = 0.967, FRI = 0.810) and exceeded cut-off minimums with regional-spine, condition-specific, and patient-specific measures. An unequivocal one-dimensional structure was determined. Internal consistency was satisfactory (α = 0.80) with no floor/ceiling effect. Post-hoc analysis of the international sample confirmed these findings.

conclusionThe SFI-10 qualitative concept-retention version was preferred to quantitative factorial and Rasch versions, demonstrated structural and criterion validity, and preferred correlation with criteria measures. Further longitudinal research is required for reliability, error, and responsiveness, plus an examination of the practical characteristics of readability and administrative burden.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationSpinal DiseasesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Cultural ComparisonCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPainPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAssessmentClinometricFunctional limitationMusculoskeletalPatient-reported outcome measureSpine

Identifiers

PMID38532353
PMCPMC10964542

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.