Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Validity”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 613 records · Page 34Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

Adjusting effect estimates for unmeasured confounding with validation data using propensity score calibration.

Often, data on important confounders are not available in cohort studies. Sensitivity analyses based on the relation of single, but not multiple, unmeasured confounders with an exposure of interest in a separate validation study have been proposed. In this paper, the authors controlled for measured confounding in the main cohort using propensity scores (PS's) and addressed unmeasured confounding by estimating two additional PS's in a validation study. The "error-prone" PS exclusively used information available in the main cohort. The "gold standard" PS additionally included data on covariates available only in the validation study. Based on these two PS's in the validation study, regression calibration was applied to adjust regression coefficients. This propensity score calibration (PSC) adjusts for unmeasured confounding in cohort studies with validation data under certain, usually untestable, assumptions. The authors used PSC to assess the relation between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and 1-year mortality in a large cohort of elderly persons. "Traditional" adjustment resulted in a hazard ratio for NSAID users of 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77, 0.83) as compared with an unadjusted hazard ratio of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.71). Application of PSC resulted in a more plausible hazard ratio of 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.12). Until the validity and limitations of PSC have been assessed in different settings, the method should be seen as a sensitivity analysis.

Aged↗
PubMed2026

Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia mediated by ryanodine receptor 2: a validated risk stratification.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) are at risk for potentially life-threatening arrhythmic events (AEs) even while treated with β-blockers. The aim was to develop a model for individualized prediction of AEs in patients with RYR2-mediated CPVT on β-blocker monotherapy. METHODS: The derivation and independent validation cohorts included 743 and 129 patients, respectively. AEs were defined as arrhythmic syncope, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock, sudden cardiac arrest (SCA), and sudden cardiac death. Near-fatal or fatal AEs (nf/fAEs) included all AEs except for arrhythmic syncope. Prediction models using Cox regression were developed and internally and externally validated. RESULTS: A total of 102 (13.7%) patients in the derivation cohort and 24 (18.6%) patients in the validation cohort experienced ≥1 AE over a median follow-up of 5.1 [interquartile range (IQR), 7.7] and 2.4 (IQR, 4.4) years, respectively. Predictors of AE were arrhythmic syncope or SCA prior to diagnosis and age at β-blocker initiation. In the derivation and validation cohorts, the optimism-corrected C-indices of the models for AE were 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.72] and 0.59 (95% CI 0.48-0.71), respectively. For nf/fAEs, ventricular arrhythmia severity before β-blocker initiation was a fourth independent predictor, and C-indices of the models in the derivation and validation cohorts were 0.74 (95% CI 0.68-0.80) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.47-0.72), respectively. In the derivation cohort, calibration slopes were 1.00 (95% CI 0.59-1.41) for AE and 1.00 (95% CI 0.69-1.32) for nf/fAE. CONCLUSIONS: These externally validated risk prediction models using clinical parameters accurately distinguished CPVT patients on β-blocker monotherapy at low and high risk for future AEs while treated with β-blockers. These models provide guidance for implementation of clinical management therapies to prevent AEs in patients with CPVT.

Humans↗
PubMed2003

Validity of self-report screening scale for elder abuse: Women's Health Australia Study.

PURPOSE: Early identification of elder abuse requires a valid, easily administered screening instrument. This study examined the reliability and validity of the Vulnerability to Abuse Screening Scale (VASS), a 12-item self-report measure with four factors (Vulnerability, Dependence, Dejection, and Coercion). DESIGN AND METHODS: The sample consisted of 10,421 nationally representative Women's Health Australia study participants, aged 73-78, who completed the Time 2 postal survey in 1999. We tested validity of the VASS factor structure and whether baseline risk status independently predicted Time 2 attrition. RESULTS: Findings confirmed the VASS factor structure and construct validity. Four factors explained 51% of variance, and these factors were internally consistent. The Vulnerability and Coercion factors held the strongest face and construct validity for physical and psychological abuse. The Dependence and Dejection factors were valid and reliable and significantly predicted 3-year attrition after controlling for confounders. IMPLICATIONS: Further work is needed to determine sensitivity and specificity of VASS as a screening instrument for elder abuse. Qualitative research could examine specific experiences and contexts of vulnerable women.

Aged↗
PubMed1992

The validation of interviews for estimating morbidity.

Health interview surveys have been widely used to measure morbidity in developing countries, particularly for infectious diseases. Structured questionnaires using algorithms which derive sign/symptom-based diagnoses seem to be the most reliable but there have been few studies to validate them. The purpose of validation is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of brief algorithms (combinations of signs/symptoms) which can then be used for the rapid assessment of community health problems. Validation requires a comparison with an external standard such as physician or serological diagnoses. There are several potential pitfalls in assessing validity, such as selection bias, differences in populations and the pattern of diseases in study populations compared to the community. Validation studies conducted in the community may overcome bias caused by case selection. Health centre derived estimates can be adjusted and applied to the community with caution. Further study is needed to validate algorithms for important diseases in different cultural settings. Community-based studies need to be conducted, and the utility of derived algorithms for tracking disease frequency explored further.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2000

Liability and validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol in Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the inter-rater reliability between nurses and the convergent validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) in the Turkish context. METHODS: Two nurses applied the original AEP concurrently to a random subsample of 335 patient-days in internal medicine, general surgery, and gynaecology departments at a university hospital and a government teaching hospital, as a part of a larger study. Inter-rater reliability was tested by calculating overall agreement and specific agreements between nurse reviewers' AEP assessments. Validity was tested by comparing the assessments of the nurses based on the AEP with the implicit judgements of five expert physicians on a random subsample of 818 patient-days. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the AEP were calculated. Reliability and validity were also evaluated by the K statistic. RESULTS: In the reliability test, there was a high level of agreement between the two independent raters applying the AEP in the three departments studied: overall agreement = 90.7-97.6%; specific inappropriate agreement = 69.1-92.3%; specific appropriate agreement = 88.3-96.6%. In validity testing, the AEP had a sensitivity of 0.83-0.97, specificity of 0.62-0.80, and positive and negative predictive values of 0.84-0.88 and 0.73-0.95 respectively. Kappa coefficients in internal medicine and gynaecology indicated almost perfect agreement in reliability testing and moderate agreement in validity testing. In general surgery, the K coefficients showed substantial agreement in both tests. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the AEP is a reliable and valid instrument to assess appropriateness of patient-days in Turkey.

Hospital Departments↗
PubMed2004

Development and validation of an immunosuppressant therapy adherence barrier instrument.

BACKGROUND: To decrease allograft rejection as a result of non-adherence to immunosuppressant therapy (IST), a valid and reliable instrument that measures solid organ transplant patients' adherence barriers is needed. METHODS: An immunosuppressant therapy barrier scale (ITBS) was developed to assess transplant patients' perceived barriers to IST adherence and was completed by 222 transplant patients who lived in Georgia, USA. A renal transplant population subset was used to test the ITBS reliability and validity. Scale reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha coefficient of internal consistency; scale dimensionality was assessed using principal components analysis. The criterion-related validity of the scale was assessed by relating subscale scores to adherence measures and graft rejection. Nomological validity was assessed by relating barrier subscales to specific patient factors. RESULTS: Two subscales that represented 'controllable' and 'uncontrollable' barriers were found. Cronbach's alpha coefficients demonstrated acceptable reliabilities of 0.93, 0.86 and 0.91 for the 'uncontrollable' and 'controllable' subscales, and for the entire ITBS, respectively. The ITBS subscales correlated negatively with a self-reported measure of IST adherence, IST serum concentrations and IST pharmacy refill adherence rate (P<0.01). The 'uncontrollable barrier' subscale was positively correlated to kidney graft rejection (P<0.01), thus demonstrating the ITBS's validity. Males and older patients reported more adherence barriers (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The ITBS is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used to measure patients' perceived barriers to IST adherence.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Derivation and validation of a disease-specific risk score for cardiac risk stratification in chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac events (CE; cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and acute coronary syndrome) are the principal causes of death in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We sought to devise and validate a cardiac risk score to risk-stratify patients with CKD. METHODS: Clinical history and biochemical data were obtained in 167 CKD patients. CE were recorded over a median follow-up of 22 months. The hazard ratio (HR) of each independent variable using Cox regression analysis was used to derive a cardiac risk score for the prediction of events. The cardiac risk score was then applied to a validation population of 99 CKD patients to confirm its validity in predicting CE. RESULTS: CE occurred in 20 patients in the derivation group. The independent predictors of CE were cardiac history (HR 9.83, P = 0.001), body mass index (BMI; HR 1.15, P = 0.002), dialysis duration (HR 1.24, P = 0.004) and serum phosphate (HR 4.29, P = 0.001). The resulting cardiac risk score (range 26-67) gave an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.86. CE occurred in 25 patients in the validation group; the ROC curve area was similar (0.84, P = 0.11). An optimal cardiac risk score cut-off of 50 assigned high risk to 29% of the derivation and 35% of the validation group (P = 0.26). CE occurred in 35 and 57% of the high-risk derivation and validation groups, respectively (P = 0.09), and in 2 and 8% of the low-risk groups (P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Application of a cardiac risk score using cardiac history, dialysis duration, BMI and phosphate identifies CKD patients at risk of future CE.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Assessment of validity of the national public health performance standards: the local public health performance assessment instrument.

The National Public Health Performance Standards Program (NPHPSP) has developed performance standards measurement instruments, based on the 10 "Essential Services of Public Health" that are being tested in several states. This article is a report on the face and content validity of the instrument designed for local public health systems. Judgments about the face validity of the standards were obtained in a survey of local public health systems that had used the instrument in a test state. The validity of each standard was addressed along the following dimensions: the importance of the standard as a measure of the Essential Service; its completeness as a measure; and its reasonableness for achievement. All standards for each Essential Service were then judged in terms of their completeness in measuring performance of that service. Respondents judged the standards to be highly valid measures of local public health system performance. Some respondents had reservations about whether standards related to "enforcing laws and regulations" were achievable. Holding local public health systems accountable for the activities of other agencies was a factor mentioned in conjunction with those standards. The NPHPSP standards have face and content validity for measuring local public health system performance. Further testing of their validity and reliability is continuing.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2001

Content validation of the Medication Error Worksheet.

Clinical nurse specialists use a variety of preexisting instruments to measure and describe health-related concepts. It is important for clinical nurse specialists to know how to evaluate the content validity of potentially useful instruments. This study assessed the content validity of the Institute for Safe Medication Practice's Medication Error Worksheet. The worksheet is used as a questioning framework to guide data collection processes when beginning analysis of a medication error. Although the worksheet has been valuable to the Institute for Safe Medication Practice staff, its content validity has not been determined. Content validity methods included expert validation and a review of the related literature. Results support the validity of the Medication Error Worksheet and suggest that this worksheet is a comprehensive tool that may be helpful when exploring the circumstances of medication errors and when analyzing medication use systems. Results were shared with the Institute for Safe Medication Practice staff to improve the accuracy of the worksheet.

Documentation↗
PubMed2004

The Revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R): reliability and validity.

BACKGROUND: To assess outcomes of health services, providers need brief, responsive, reliable, and valid measures that can be implemented in clinical settings with minimal cost and burden. The Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) is a self-report measure developed in 1984 to assess mental health treatment outcomes. During the past 3 years, multiple methods were used to revise the instrument to improve reliability, validity, and applicability to diverse groups of mental health service recipients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to field test the revised instrument, make further changes based on analysis of the field test data, and assess reliability and validity of the final version (BASIS-24). METHODS: A field test was implemented at 27 treatment sites across the United States. A total of 2656 inpatients and 3222 outpatients participated. Factor analytic methods, classic test theory, and item response theory modeling were used to select the most discriminating, nonredundant items for inclusion in the final version of the instrument and to assess its reliability and validity. Item response theory modeling was used to score the instrument. RESULTS: The final instrument includes 24 items assessing 6 domains: depression/ functioning, interpersonal relationships, self-harm, emotional lability, psychosis, and substance abuse. Test-retest and internal consistency reliability were acceptable. Tests of construct and discriminant validity supported the instrument's ability to discriminate groups expected to differ in mental health status, and its correlation with other measures of mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of the BASIS-24 supported its reliability and validity for assessing mental health status from the patient's perspective.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Reliability and validity of Canada's Physical Activity Monitor for assessing trends.

PURPOSE: This investigation assessed the reliability and criterion validity of the Physical Activity Monitor, a telephone-interview adaptation of the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire (MLTPAQ), which is currently used to assess trends in the Canadian population. METHODS: A sample of 512 people aged 18 yr and older was selected by random-digit dialing for telephone interviewing in the reliability study. The Monitor questions were administered twice, 3 wk apart. For the criterion validity study, a sample of 148 people aged 18-69 yr was selected at random from households. Participants completed the Monitor questions by telephone and an in-home step test to estimate maximum oxygen uptake. Another random sample of individuals aged 18-69 yr participated in a comparison study of the Monitor against the 1988 Campbell's Survey of Well-Being (CSWB) instrument. All studies were conducted in the vicinity of Toronto, Ontario. Spearman correlations controlling for age and sex were calculated as a measure of association for the reliability, validity, and comparison studies. Validity estimates were further adjusted for body mass index and physical activity demands of work and chores. RESULTS: The Monitor instrument produced reliable estimates of total energy expenditure (P=0.90, P<0.0001) with criterion validity of 0.36 (P<0.0001). The association between estimates of total energy expenditure derived from the Monitor and CSWB instruments was 0.77 (P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The Physical Activity Monitor has acceptable test-retest reliability and criterion validity. The research also demonstrated that for the purpose of population monitoring a change in data collection mode-telephone interview versus self-administration in households-can yield reasonably comparable estimates from two adaptations of the MLTPAQ.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The validity and reliability of a Chinese version of the family burden interview schedule.

BACKGROUND: The caregiver burden within the family is one of the most commonly used outcome variables in research studies of patient care provision. However, few measures of family caregiver burden have been validated for use with Asian populations. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Family Burden Interview Schedule. METHOD: The first phase of the investigation involved translation and back translation of the measure for burden and a review by an expert panel. In this phase, equivalence between the Chinese and English versions, content validity, and test-retest reliability of the Family Burden Interview Schedule were assessed using a sample including 30 family caregivers of mental patients. The second phase established the internal consistency and construct validity of the scale using a sample comprising 185 family caregivers of patients with schizophrenia. Sensitivity of the scale for families of schizophrenic patients was examined through comparison with 40 caregivers of patients who had major affective disorder. RESULTS: The Chinese version of the Family Burden Interview Schedule adequately addressed the original concepts and dimensions, achieving 96% on the Content Validity Index. These results demonstrated high levels of equivalence with the original English version (intra-class correlation [ICC] of .87 for the overall scale and.80-.89 for the six domains). It also demonstrated a high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha of .87 for the scale and .78-.88 for the domains) and adequate test - retest response stability (r = .83 for the scale and r = .88-.92 for the domains). The mean scores for the overall scale and domains of the Family Burden Interview Schedule differed significantly between the family providers of care for the two illness groups and between the groups with high and low time involvement in caregiving. The principal components analysis showed the presence of five factors that together explained 65.85% of the variance. It also demonstrated high factor loadings as well as item-to-scale and between-subscales intercorrelations, indicating good construct validity of the burden measure. DISCUSSION: The findings for the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Family Burden Interview Schedule established its potential as a research instrument for measuring caregiver burden among Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

Asian People↗
PubMed2001

Validation of the Turkish version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for use in low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: A reliability and validity study of a previously translated version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). OBJECTIVES: To validate the Turkish version of the RMDQ for use in low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Clinical and epidemiologic research related to low back pain in the Turkish population would be facilitated by the availability of well-established outcome measures. METHODS: A total of 81 outpatients with low back pain, 64 of whom were followed up on a second occasion, were assessed by the RMDQ. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Internal construct validity was assessed by Rasch analysis; external construct validity was assessed by association with pain and spinal movement. Responsiveness was tested by both the nonparametric and parametric effect sizes. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the RMDQ is found to be adequate (>0.85) at both times, with high intraclass correlation coefficient also at both time points. Internal construct validity of the scale is good, indicating a single underlying construct. Expected associations with pain confirm external construct validity. There is little evidence of differential item functioning. The scale is at the ordinal level. Responsiveness of the RMDQ is good and greater than observed change in spinal movement. CONCLUSIONS: The RMDQ is a robust unidimensional ordinal measure, largely free of differential item functioning, which works well in the Turkish population. Nonparametric effect sizes of ordinal scales are found to overestimate or underestimate the true effect size depending on the nature of the scale and the distribution of patients at baseline.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Validation of the Reflux Disease Questionnaire for a German population.

OBJECTIVE: We describe the validation of a German-language version of the Reflux Disease Questionnaire in what is the first validation study of this patient questionnaire for a non-English speaking population. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is one of the most common diseases in primary care and has a significant negative impact on patients' quality of life. There is no gold standard for diagnosing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, however, so the valid assessment of symptoms is especially important. DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 5689 patients (92%) completed the questionnaire both before treatment and after 2 weeks. The results were tested for validity and reliability. Predictive validity was tested in a pilot study of 100 patients. Convergent validity was examined using the Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia Questionnaire for the assessment of disease-specific quality of life and the McMaster Overall Treatment Evaluation for the assessment of therapeutic success. RESULTS: Principal component analysis suggested a three-factor solution with the subscores heartburn, regurgitation, and dyspepsia. The internal consistencies of the subscores were between 0.84 and 0.86. Item difficulty ranged from 0.33 to 0.53, and corrected item-total correlation from 0.66 to 0.72. Effect sizes were between 0.8 and 1.0. CONCLUSION: The German version of the questionnaire has good psychometric properties and is responsive to changes in health. Thus, we conclude that the German Reflux Disease Questionnaire is suitable for the assessment of heartburn, regurgitation, and treatment response, both in primary care settings and clinical studies.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Validation of the Omron HEM-907 device for blood pressure measurement.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to validate the Omron HEM-907 blood pressure (BP) measuring device according to the international validation protocol. DESIGN: The international validation protocol is divided into two phases: the first phase is performed on 15 selected subjects and if the device passes this phase, 18 more subjects are selected making a total number of 33 subjects on which the final validation is performed. METHODS: For each subject, BP measurements were performed simultaneously by two trained observers using mercury sphygmomanometers alternately with the Omron HEM-907 device. In all, 99 measurements were obtained for comparison. The difference between the BP value given by the device and that obtained by the two observers (mean of the two observers) was calculated for each measure. RESULTS: The difference between the two observers was -1 +/- 2 mmHg for the systolic BP (SBP) and for the diastolic BP (DBP). The Omron HEM-907 passed the first phase of the validation process. For the second phase, the average differences between the device and mercury sphygmomanometer readings were -1 +/- 7 and -5 +/- 6 mmHg for SBP and DBP respectively. Readings for the HEM-907 device differed by less than 5 mmHg for 61 of the systolic readings and 52 of the diastolic readings; by less than 10 mmHg for 85 of the systolic readings and 85 of the diastolic readings; and by less than 15 mmHg for 94 of the systolic readings and 96 of the diastolic readings. CONCLUSIONS: The Omron HEM-907 device passes the two phases of the international validation protocol.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Validation of the Omron MX3 Plus oscillometric blood pressure monitoring device according to the European Society of Hypertension international protocol.

BACKGROUND: Demand for devices that allow the self-assessment of blood pressure continues to rise. Few self-assessment devices, however, have been validated against recognised protocols. The aim of this study was to validate the Omron MX3 Plus (model HEM-742-E) oscillometric blood pressure measuring device in accordance with the international protocol of the European Society of Hypertension. This automated device is currently available to the public in the UK through high-street chemists and other outlets. DESIGN: The European Society of Hypertension's international protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults divides validation into two phases. The first phase is performed on 15 individuals, five in each of three specific blood pressure categories. If the device passes the first phase then a further 18 patients are recruited, making a total of 33 individuals on which the final validation is based. All subjects are aged 30 years or above. METHODS: The automated device was connected in parallel to two reference mercury sphygmomanometers. Nine sequential same-arm measurements were taken from each subject by two trained observers, alternating between the mercury sphygmomanometers and the test device. RESULTS: The Omron MX3 Plus passed both phases of the ESH validation process. The mean (standard deviation) of the difference between the observer and the device measurements was -1.15 (5.7) mmHg for systolic and -1.61 (4.7) mmHg for diastolic pressures, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Omron MX3 Plus can be recommended for home and professional use in an adult population.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Validation of a Spanish version of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Questionnaire (SMFA).

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to develop a linguistically appropriate, culturally adapted, and appropriately validated Spanish version of the SMFA (SMFA-Mex). DESIGN: Validation of a survey-based outcome instrument. SETTING: Busy state hospital in southern Mexico. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive trauma patients with a variety of orthopedic disorders. INTERVENTION: N/A. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The SMFA-Mex was forward and back translated, administered to orthopedic trauma patients, and compared against the Spanish version of the SF-36s for criterion validity. Statistical analysis included factor analysis, criterion validation with the SF-36, and internal measures of reliability. RESULTS: Factor analysis demonstrated three separate subscale dimensions: 1) upper-extremity dysfunction, 2) lower-extremity dysfunction, and 3) lifestyle alterations. Item analysis showed a high degree of internal consistency for the three subscales (subscale 1, r = 0.95; subscale 2, r = 0.94; subscale 3, r = 0.92). Test-retest reliability at 7 days was 0.93 for the upper-extremity dysfunction subscale, 0.95 for the lower-extremity dysfunction subscale, and 0.92 for the lifestyle-alterations subscale. Construct validity was established by comparison of the Brazilian version of the SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: The SMFA-Mex was successfully translated and culturally adapted from the English original. The SMFA-Mex demonstrated adequate scale reliability and validity and yielded three distinct subscales using factor analysis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

The core outcomes for neck pain: validation of a new outcome measure.

STUDY DESIGN: Patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial were asked to complete various questionnaires, which were then compared to establish validity for a new neck pain questionnaire. OBJECTIVES: To validate a new and brief outcome measure for use with patients with mechanical neck pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neck pain is a very common problem and one that clinicians will be required to treat with some regularity. In today's climate of evidence-based practice and the need to quantify and justify clinical intervention, a quick and easy method to evaluate progress is required. Such a measure has already been produced for those experiencing back pain, but as yet, there is no such measure for neck pain and this needs to be addressed. METHODS: The back pain measure was adapted to enable its use with patients with neck pain. Repeatability was assessed by using a 1-week test/retest on 104 patients who were enrolled in a neck pain trial. Validity was assessed by comparing the new questionnaire against other already well validated measures (i.e., the Neck Disability Index and a Visual Analogue Scale for pain) with 133 patients. RESULTS: The test/retest showed excellent repeatability with high intraclass correlations and P < 0.001 for each question tested. The Core Neck Pain Questionnaire also showed good validity, giving close agreement to the other comparison measures. CONCLUSION: The short Core Neck Pain Questionnaire has been demonstrated to be repeatable and valid as a brief outcome measure for use with patients with mechanical neck pain.

Adult↗