About: Spine is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Lumbar & Low back pain. It has an ISSN identifier of 0362-2436. Over the lifetime, 18849 publication(s) have been published receiving 1170064 citation(s).
Topics: Lumbar, Low back pain, Scoliosis, Spinal fusion, Back pain
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: The guidelines described in this document are based on a review of cross-cultural adaptation in the medical, sociological, and psychological literature and led to the description of a thorough adaptation process designed to maximize the attainment of semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalence between the source and target questionnaires.
Abstract: With the increase in the number of multinational and multicultural research projects, the need to adapt health status measures for use in other than the source language has also grown rapidly. 1,4,27 Most questionnaires were developed in English-speaking countries, 11 but even within these countries, researchers must consider immigrant populations in studies of health, especially when their exclusion could lead to a systematic bias in studies of health care utilization or quality of life. 9,11 The cross-cultural adaptation of a health status selfadministered questionnaire for use in a new country, culture, and/or language necessitates use of a unique method, to reach equivalence between the original source and target versions of the questionnaire. It is now recognized that if measures are to be used across cultures, the items must not only be translated well linguistically, but also must be adapted culturally to maintain the content validity of the instrument at a conceptual level across different cultures. 6,11‐13,15,24 Attention to this level of detail allows increased confidence that the impact of a disease or its treatment is described in a similar manner in multinational trials or outcome evaluations. The term “cross-cultural adaptation” is used to encompass a process that looks at both language (translation) and cultural adaptation issues in the process of preparing a questionnaire for use in another setting. Cross-cultural adaptations should be considered for several different scenarios. In some cases, this is more obvious than in others. Guillemin et al 11 suggest five different examples of when attention should be paid to this adaptation by comparing the target (where it is going to be used) and source (where it was developed) language and culture. The first scenario is that it is to be used in the same language and culture in which it was developed. No adaptation is necessary. The last scenario is the opposite extreme, the application of a questionnaire in a different culture, language and country—moving the Short Form 36-item questionnaire from the United States (source) to Japan (target) 7 which would necessitate translation and cultural adaptation. The other scenarios are summarized in Table 1 and reflect situations when some translation and/or adaptation is needed. The guidelines described in this document are based on a review of cross-cultural adaptation in the medical, sociological, and psychological literature. This review led to the description of a thorough adaptation process designed to maximize the attainment of semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalence between the source and target questionnaires. 13 . Further experience in cross-cultural adaptation of generic and diseasespecific instruments and alternative strategies driven by different research groups 18 have led to some refinements
TL;DR: The ODI remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure, and the process of using the ODI is reviewed and should be the subject of further research.
Abstract: Study design The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) has become one of the principal condition-specific outcome measures used in the management of spinal disorders. This review is based on publications using the ODI identified from the authors' personal databases, the Science Citation Index, and hand searches of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders. Objectives To review the versions of this instrument, document methods by which it has been validated, collate data from scores found in normal and back pain populations, provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI, and maintain the ODI as a gold standard outcome measure. Summary of background data It has now been 20 years since its original publication. More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index. The authors have a large correspondence file relating to the ODI, that is cited in most of the large textbooks related to spinal disorders. Methods All the published versions of the questionnaire were identified. A systematic review of this literature was made. The various reports of validation were collated and related to a version. Results Four versions of the ODI are available in English and nine in other languages. Some published versions contain misprints, and many omit the scoring system. At least 114 studies contain usable data. These data provide both validation and standards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample populations. Conclusions The ODI remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure. The process of using the ODI is reviewed and should be the subject of further research. The receiver operating characteristics should be explored in a population with higher self-report disabilities. The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood, particularly in sensitivity to real change.
TL;DR: The SF-36 (Medical Outcomes Trust, Boston, MA) is a multipurpose, short-form health survey with only 36 questions, which yields an eight-scale profile of scores as well as physical and mental health summary measures as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The SF-36 (Medical Outcomes Trust, Boston, MA) is a multipurpose, short-form health survey with only 36 questions. It yields an eight-scale profile of scores as well as physical and mental health summary measures. It is a generic measure, as opposed to one that targets a specific age, disease, or tr
TL;DR: The development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure selfrated disability due to back pain is described, which is short, simple, sensitive, and reliable.
Abstract: One of the problems in mounting a trial of treatment of back pain is the lack of suitable outcome measures. This paper describes the development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure selfrated disability due to back pain. The questionnaire is short, simple, sensitive, and reliable. I
TL;DR: Disc degeneration can be graded reliably on routine T2-weighted magnetic resonance images using the grading system and algorithm presented in this investigation.
Abstract: Study design A reliability study was conducted Objectives To develop a classification system for lumbar disc degeneration based on routine magnetic resonance imaging, to investigate the applicability of a simple algorithm, and to assess the reliability of this classification system Summary of background data A standardized nomenclature in the assessment of disc abnormalities is a prerequisite for a comparison of data from different investigations The reliability of the assessment has a crucial influence on the validity of the data Grading systems of disc degeneration based on state of the art magnetic resonance imaging and corresponding reproducibility studies currently are sparse Methods A grading system for lumbar disc degeneration was developed on the basis of the literature An algorithm to assess the grading was developed and optimized by reviewing lumbar magnetic resonance examinations The reliability of the algorithm in depicting intervertebral disc alterations was tested on the magnetic resonance images of 300 lumbar intervertebral discs in 60 patients (33 men and 27 women) with a mean age of 40 years (range, 10-83 years) All scans were analyzed independently by three observers Intra- and interobserver reliabilities were assessed by calculating kappa statistics Results There were 14 Grade I, 82 Grade II, 72 Grade III, 68 Grade IV, and 64 Grade V discs The kappa coefficients for intra- and interobserver agreement were substantial to excellent: intraobserver (kappa range, 084-090) and interobserver (kappa range, 069-081) Complete agreement was obtained, on the average, in 838% of all the discs A difference of one grade occurred in 159% and a difference of two or more grades in 13% of all the cases Conclusion Disc degeneration can be graded reliably on routine T2-weighted magnetic resonance images using the grading system and algorithm presented in this investigation
Related Journals (5)
European Spine Journal
7.8K papers, 244.2K citations
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
7.1K papers, 349.8K citations
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
25.4K papers, 1.2M citations
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume
25.9K papers, 1.5M citations
Journal of Neurosurgery
30.9K papers, 1.3M citations