↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the Orebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire in patients with chronic neck pain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of the Orebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire in patients with chronic neck pain
Published in
BMC Research Notes, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13104-018-3269-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anke Langenfeld, Carolien Bastiaenen, Florian Brunner, Jaap Swanenburg

Abstract

To validate the German version of OMPSQ (OMPSQ-G) for patients with chronic neck pain. After translating OMPSQ to German, we assessed the discriminant validity between patients and healthy adults. Convergent validity was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficients between domains of OMPSQ-G and the German version of neck disability index (NDI-G) and visual analogue scale (VAS) of neck pain intensity. Floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, test-retest and relative reliability were assessed. Fifty patients with chronic neck pain (mean age, 43.6 years; 34 females) and 24 healthy adults (mean age, 50.4 years; 18 females) participated. Mann-Whitney U tests showed significant differences in OMPSQ scores between both groups at the baseline (z = - 4.6; p < 0.001) and second time point (z = - 4.8; p < 0.001). OMPSQ-G scores highly and moderately correlated with NDI-G (ρ = 0.70) and VAS (ρ = 0.41) scores, respectively. There were no floor or ceiling effects. Cronbach's alpha was 0.94. OMPSQ-G showed high reliability (intraclass correlation 2.1: 0.93; standard error of measurement, 6.9; smallest detectable change, 20 points). The Bland-Altman plot indicated no systematic error. OMPSQ-G showed good validity and reliability in patients with neck pain. Trial registration NCT02540343.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 18 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,315,637
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,949
of 4,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,158
of 331,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#57
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 331,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 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 52% of its contemporaries.