| Title |
Responsiveness and minimum important change of the Oswestry Disability Index in Italian subjects with symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10195-017-0446-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carla Vanti, Silvano Ferrari, Jorge Hugo Villafañe, Pedro Berjano, Marco Monticone |
| Abstract |
This study aims to investigate the responsiveness and the minimum important change of the Italian version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI-I) in subjects with symptomatic specific low back pain associated with lumbar spondylolisthesis (SPL). One hundred and fifty-one patients with symptomatic SPL completed the ODI-I, a 0-100 numerical rating scale (NRS), and performed the prone and supine bridge tests. The global perception of effectiveness was measured with a 7-point Likert scale. Responsiveness was assessed by distribution methods (minimum detectable change [MDC], effect size [ES], standardized response mean [SRM]) and anchor-based methods (ROC curves). The MDC was 4.23, the ES was 0.95 and the SRM was 1.25. ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.76 indicating moderate discriminating capacity. The best cut-off point for the dichotomous outcome was 7.5 (sensitivity 90.3%, specificity 56.7%). . The ODI-I proved to be responsive in detecting changes after conservative treatment in subjects with lumbar SPL. II. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 26% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 23% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 30% |
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 20 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,906,966
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#115
of 222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,893
of 308,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 308,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 50% of its contemporaries.