ArticleThe Journal of manual & manipulative therapy2025
Inter-rater reliability of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) in evaluating and classifying chronic pelvic pain syndrome.
Article in The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) involves complex interactions between the musculoskeletal system, nervous system, and psychosocial factors. A major challenge in managing CPPS is the lack of reliable assessment and classification systems. The Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is a widely used and reliable classification system for assessing and managing painful musculoskeletal conditions affecting the spine and extremities. This study's primary objective was to assess the inter-rater reliability of the MDT assessment in diagnosing CPPS using clinical vignettes. Secondary objectives included determining the prevalence of MDT classification categories.
methodsFive MDT clinicians classified clinical vignettes into three categories: 1) Spinal Derangement, 2) Pelvic Floor Contractile Dysfunction, or 3) MDT OTHER subgroups. The vignettes were developed from the McKenzie Pelvic Pain Assessment Form. Inter-rater reliability among clinicians was calculated using the Fleiss kappa statistic with 95% confidence intervals, and Cohen's kappa examined reliability between pairs of raters.
resultsA total of 76 vignettes were developed (40 females and 36 males). Good inter-rater reliability was found among clinicians (Fleiss kappa = 0.616, 95% CI = 0.598-0.633,
conclusionsThe study indicates good inter-rater reliability among MDT clinicians in classifying pelvic pain syndrome. However, clinical vignettes may not fully capture the complexities of real participant interactions, potentially inflating agreement. Future studies should incorporate direct observation of real participant encounters alongside clinical vignettes to improve validity.
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.