| Title |
Predictive ability of a modified Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire in an acute/subacute low back pain working population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, July 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-010-1509-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charles Philip Gabel, Markus Melloh, Michael Yelland, Brendan Burkett, Anne Roiko |
| Abstract |
The original 'Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire' (original-ÖMPQ) has been shown to have limitations in practicality, factor structure, face and content validity. This study addressed these concerns by modifying its content producing the 'Örebro Musculoskeletal Screening Questionnaire' (ÖMSQ). The ÖMSQ and original-ÖMPQ were tested concurrently in acute/subacute low back pain working populations (pilot n = 44, main n = 106). The ÖMSQ showed improved face and content validity, which broadened potential application, and improved practicality with two-thirds less missing responses. High reliability (0.975, p < 0.05, ICC: 2.1), criterion validity (Spearman's r = 0.97) and internal consistency (α = 0.84) were achieved, as were predictive ability cut-off scores from ROC curves (112-120 ÖMSQ-points), statistically different ÖMSQ scores (p < 0.001) for each outcome trait, and a strong correlation with recovery time (Spearman's, r = 0.71). The six-component factor structure reflected the constructs originally proposed. The ÖMSQ can be substituted for the original-ÖMPQ in this population. Further research will assess its applicability in broader populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 23 | 26% |
| Unknown | 15 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,911,928
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#867
of 4,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,740
of 94,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#11
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,594 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 94,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.