Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38812821›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2024

Test-Retest Reliability of Pain Sensitivity Measures in Individuals with Shoulder Pain.

Rani Othman, Abdulrahman Mohammed Bajaber, Anas Mohammed Alhabshi, Majed Albadi, Rawan Aldhabi, Muataz Almaddah, Abdullah Alqarni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Association of increased greater tubercle angle and critical shoulder angle with rotator cuff tears].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Rani OthmanPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-6764-7058
Abdulrahman Mohammed BajaberPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0006-1983-666X
Anas Mohammed AlhabshiPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Majed AlbadiPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Rawan AldhabiPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Muataz AlmaddahPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah AlqarniPhysical Therapy Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4502-5151

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Central sensitization (CS) has been proposed as a possible contributor to persistent shoulder pain. Measures of sensitivity, such as quantitative sensory tests (QSTs) and sensitivity to movements evoked pain (SMEP), have been increasingly used to investigate CS in a wide range of painful conditions. However, there is a lack of data on whether QST and SMEP are reliable among individuals with shoulder pain. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the intra-rater test-retest reliability of QST and SMEP in individuals with chronic shoulder pain. Materials and Methods: Forty-seven individuals with chronic shoulder pain were enrolled in the study. The QST measures, including pressure pain threshold (PPT) and mechanical temporal summation (MTS), were tested, and SMEP was measured with a lifting task. Relative and absolute reliability were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 3,1) and standard error of the measurement (SEM), respectively. Results: The results showed that the ICC coefficients for all sensitivity measures were moderate to good, ranging from 0.63 to 0.86. The SEM% for the QST measures at all sites ranged from 21.4% to 36%, with TS at the forearm demonstrating a high SEM% (greater than 30%). The SMEP measure also showed a high SEM% (46%). Conclusion: The results showed that the sensitivity measures had moderate to good reliability among individuals with shoulder pain. Acceptable limits of accuracy of measurements were demonstrated for TS and PPT measures, while SMEP demonstrated high error, highlighting the need for further refinement of this measure among these populations.

Indexed as

central sensitizationquantitative sensory testingreliabilitysensitive to movement evoked painshoulder pain

Identifiers

PMID38812821
PMCPMC11135557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.