FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2004209232> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2004209232 endingPage "615" @default.
• W2004209232 startingPage "607" @default.
• W2004209232 abstract "Study Design. Analysis of longitudinal data collected prospectively from patients seen in 27 National Spine Network member centers across the United States. Objective. To evaluate the responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS scales, and all scales and summary scales of the MOS Short-Form 36 (SF-36) for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms. Summary of Background Data. The responsiveness of general and condition-specific health status instruments is a key concept for clinicians and scientists. Various authors have explored responsiveness in common surveys used to assess spine patients. Although it is generally believed that condition-specific measures are more responsive to change in the condition under study, in the case of low back pain, most authors agree that further exploration is necessary. Methods. Patients with diagnoses of herniated disc, spinal stenosis, and spondylosis from the National Spine Network database who completed baseline and 3-month follow-up surveys were analyzed. Patient-provider consensus regarding improvement, worsening, or no change in the condition was selected as the external criterion. Responsiveness was evaluated using ROC curve analysis and effect size calculations. Results. Nine hundred and seventy patients had complete data at baseline and 3 months. At follow-up, 68% of the patients had consensus improvement. Based on ROC analysis, scales assessing pain were significantly more responsive than scales assessing function. There were no significant differences between the condition-specific scales and their equivalent general-health counterpart. The scales with the highest probabilities of correctly identifying patient’s improvement were: the condition-specific pain scale from MODEMS (PAIN, ROC = 0.758); the combined pain and function scale from MODEMS (MPDL, ROC = 0.755); the general pain scale from the SF-36 (BP, ROC = 0.753); the combined pain and function scale from the SF-36 (PCS, ROC = 0.745); the condition-specific function measure from the Oswestry (ODI, ROC = 0.723); and the physical function measure from the SF-36 (PF, ROC = 0.721). A similar rank order was typically maintained with effect size calculations. Results were nearly identical in patients with multiple non-spine-related comorbidities and in patients with high degrees of perceived disability. The BP scale was most responsive to worsening of symptoms. Conclusion. For studies of patients with low back problems, the general SF-36 may be a sufficient measure of health status and patient function, without the need for additional condition-specific instruments. Pain scales appear to be the most responsive measures in patients with low back pain." @default.
• W2004209232 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2004209232 creator A5015676344 @default.
• W2004209232 creator A5053981238 @default.
• W2004209232 creator A5084073344 @default.
• W2004209232 creator A5088556026 @default.
• W2004209232 date "2003-03-01" @default.
• W2004209232 modified "2023-10-08" @default.
• W2004209232 title "Is a Condition-Specific Instrument for Patients with Low Back Pain/Leg Symptoms Really Necessary?" @default.
• W2004209232 cites W1991899643 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W1995633792 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W1998207473 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W1998884854 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2004769253 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2006880043 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2017359398 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2022506390 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2026729403 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2029959415 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2030430403 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2053496236 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2071351610 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2081034423 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2081248103 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2102150307 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2113750014 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2157825442 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2171415980 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2324883064 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W2984559524 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W4242596210 @default.
• W2004209232 cites W4292806894 @default.
• W2004209232 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000050654.97387.df" @default.
• W2004209232 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12642770" @default.
• W2004209232 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W2004209232 type Work @default.
• W2004209232 sameAs 2004209232 @default.
• W2004209232 citedByCount "119" @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322012 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322013 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322014 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322015 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322016 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322017 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322018 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322019 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322020 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322021 @default.
• W2004209232 countsByYear W20042092322022 @default.
• W2004209232 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2004209232 hasAuthorship W2004209232A5015676344 @default.
• W2004209232 hasAuthorship W2004209232A5053981238 @default.
• W2004209232 hasAuthorship W2004209232A5084073344 @default.
• W2004209232 hasAuthorship W2004209232A5088556026 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C2775998654 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C2776501849 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C2780907711 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C534262118 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C58471807 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C126322002 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C142724271 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C1862650 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C204787440 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C2775998654 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C2776501849 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C2780907711 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C534262118 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C58471807 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C71924100 @default.
• W2004209232 hasConceptScore W2004209232C99508421 @default.
• W2004209232 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2004209232 hasLocation W20042092321 @default.
• W2004209232 hasLocation W20042092322 @default.
• W2004209232 hasOpenAccess W2004209232 @default.
• W2004209232 hasPrimaryLocation W20042092321 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W1581546178 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W1987590652 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W2040478958 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W2041390866 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W2113751651 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W2892578372 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W2946569524 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W4225164115 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W4317034777 @default.
• W2004209232 hasRelatedWork W633410099 @default.
• W2004209232 hasVolume "28" @default.
• W2004209232 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2004209232 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2004209232 magId "2004209232" @default.
• W2004209232 workType "article" @default.