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 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

Validity of occupational histories obtained by interview with female workers.

This study measured the validity of work histories obtained by interview with 84 female workers and examined specific factors which influence such validity. This is the first validation of work histories collected by interviews with women. The validity of each interview was assessed over a period of 29 years, from 1955 to 1983. The information provided by the worker was compared annually to job information registered in public and union records. On the average, interviews yielded the correct information (either employer's name or nonworking year) for 81% of the person years of these subjects. However, there was a time effect; the average validity score for recent employment (1972-1983) was 89%, while that for employment in the more distant past (1955-1971) was 74%. Furthermore, workers who had fewer jobs, had longer durations of employment, and were non-French speaking had higher validity scores. Most of these findings are consistent with previous studies conducted among male respondents.

Employment↗
PubMed2005

How the psychotherapy research community must work toward measurement validity and why.

The clinical and the scientific value of the whole psychotherapy research enterprise depends upon the construct validity of its Mental Health Status (MHS) measurements. This is essentially a matter of conceptual validity, that is, what we agree that MHS reasonably means. Any theory of psychotherapy can be true only insofar as it involves independent variables that have demonstrated causal relevance to such conceptually valid measurements of MHS, which is also what makes the measurements of these independent variables predictively valid. Every published efficacy, effectiveness, and case study that tests or explores for explanations of MHS ought to involve the same conceptually valid MHS measures, but the necessary validity is still undemonstrated. It cannot be demonstrated unless the research community reaches a conceptual consensus on MHS, a consensus that decisive psychotherapy research must await.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2006

Metric attributes of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale 3.0 battery: part II, construct and content validity.

This article is the second of a two-part series concerning the metric properties of the following three Parkinson's disease (PD) scales: modified Hoehn and Yahr staging (H&Y), Schwab and England (S&E), and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) 3.0. Part II focuses on construct and content validity. To assess construct validity, a sample of 1,136 PD patients completed the above-mentioned PD scales. Correlation coefficients between measures of disability and dysfunction [S&E, UPDRS Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and UPDRS Motor Examination] were |r| = 0.69-0.77, indicating good convergent validity. Results showed that the S&E (F(5,945) = 193.47; P < 0.0001) and UPDRS subscales discriminated between modified H&Y stages (F(20,2784) = 25.28; P < 0.001). A panel of 12 to 13 international experts rated the relevance of the scales and items. This enabled the scales' content validity index to be calculated, which ranged from 41.7% (UPDRS Mentation) to 83.3% (UPDRS Motor Examination). In conclusion, while the modified H&Y, S&E, and UPDRS displayed satisfactory construct validity, the content validity of all scales except UPDRS Motor Examination failed to attain adequate standards.

Aged↗
PubMed2007

Extending the validity of the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) at the time of prostate biopsy in a racially-mixed population.

The Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) has been validated for assessing men with prostate cancer for cancer-specific anxiety. It was originally validated in a predominantly white population. The MAX-PC Prostate Cancer Anxiety Subscale (MAX-PC-PCAS) may be relevant for measuring cancer-specific anxiety in undiagnosed men at risk for prostate cancer. We assess the validity of the MAX-PC-PCAS at the time of prostate biopsy (n = 178). Questions assessed socio-demographic information, health status, patient-estimated risk of cancer, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale--Anxiety Subscale (HADS-A), and the MAX-PC-PCAS. The patients' most recent PSA was recorded. Cronbach's alpha, inter-item correlations, and Pearson correlations with both the HADS-A and clinical variables were compared with the original validation sample. Our sample was younger (63.1 vs 71.1 years), had a larger fraction of African-Americans (43 vs 10%), and had higher PSAs. Cronbach's alpha was equivalent (0.91 vs 0.90), median inter-item correlation was equivalent (0.63 vs 0.61), and Pearson correlation with HADS-A was higher (0.71 vs 0.57). Anxiety levels were not correlated with PSA levels, and there were minor differences in the validation findings by race. The validity of the MAX-PC-PCAS extends to men without cancer undergoing biopsy and to African-Americans.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Examination of movement in patients with long-lasting musculoskeletal pain: reliability and validity.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An examination method based on psychosomatic physiotherapy, with 24 standardized tests related to general aspects of mobility, flexibility and the ability to relax, is used in some pain and rehabilitation clinics in Scandinavia in order to document where--and to what degree--patients have aberrations within the domain 'movement'. The measurement properties of the movement tests have, however, not been investigated in patients with long-lasting musculoskeletal pain. The aims of the present study were, therefore, to investigate inter-tester reliability and validity (construct, discriminative and concurrent validity) related to movement. METHOD: The study design was cross-sectional. Reliability was examined by three physiotherapists examining 19 people. Construct validity was studied by means of structural equation modelling (SEM). Discriminative validity was examined by comparing movement data from 247 patients with long-lasting musculoskeletal pain, and 104 healthy subjects. The patient sample was categorized according to localized or widespread pain, and movement scores compared between the groups. Most patients filled in a psychological screening questionnaire (MMPI-2), plus information about pain intensity and function, and concurrent validity of the movement measures were examined by correlation. RESULTS: SEM results indicated a modified movement scale, consisting of 16 items in four subscales. Both the original and modified versions showed good reliability, and scores differed significantly between healthy subjects and patients, and between patients with localized versus widespread pain. A relationship was found between the movement tests and psychological characteristics, but mainly in patients with widespread pain. Significant relationships were found between the ability to relax and pain, and between all aspects of movement and function. CONCLUSIONS: Movement may be reliably and validly assessed with composite scores from 4 x 4 items. The method may be useful as a global screening instrument in order to examine where, and to what extent, patients with long-lasting pain problems have movement aberrations; findings to be addressed in treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Intratester and intertester reliability and criterion validity of the parallelogram and universal goniometers for active knee flexion in healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A new parallelogram goniometer was designed by the Rehabilitation Centre of the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group in 1983. The advantage of using such a goniometer is that the clinician is not required to estimate the joint axis of rotation when taking a measurement. The parallelogram goniometer has obtained a good intratester and intertester reliability when measuring active range of motion of hip abduction on eight individuals with hip pathologies. However, the validity of the parallelogram goniometer has not been examined. The purposes of this study were to examine the intratester and intertester reliability and the criterion validity of the parallelogram and universal goniometers for active knee flexion on healthy individuals. SUBJECTS: Sixty healthy university students (44 females and 16 males; mean age of 20.6 yrs.) participated to this study. METHODS: Measurements with the universal and parallelogram goniometers were taken in two different positions, the smaller and larger angles of active knee flexion. All measurements were taken by two trained testers. A radiograph was taken in both positions to serve as the 'gold standard'. The sequence of the measurements and radiographs were randomly selected. The intra and intertester reliability of both goniometers were established by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) using the repeated-measures ANOVA. The criterion validity was examined by calculating Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (tau) between each goniometric and radiologic measurements. A 0.05 level of significance was chosen for each statistical test. RESULTS: Intratester reliability ranged from good to excellent for the small angles (ICC = 0.85 and 0.87) and the large angles (ICC = 0.91 and 0.96) when using the parallelogram goniometer. Intertester reliability was fair for the small angles of flexion (ICC = 0.43 to 0.52) and good to excellent for the large angles of flexion (ICC = 0.82 to 0.88). The parallelogram goniometer was found to have greater validity when measuring the large angles of knee flexion (r = 0.73 and 0.77) compared to the small angles of knee flexion (r = 0.33 and 0.41). Similar results of reliability and validity were obtained with the universal goniometer. CONCLUSION: The results of this study have clinical importance. The use of the parallelogram goniometer was found to be as reliable and valid as the universal goniometer when measuring active knee flexion. However, the parallelogram goniometer offered clinicians the advantages of obtaining precise angular measurements with fewer adjustments, and a faster application technique. Further studies on the parallelogram goniometer are necessary among individuals presenting with altered range of motion at different joints.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Validation of assays for use with combination vaccines.

A general methodology is presented for the validation of assays used for testing combination vaccines. The presentation is detailed and technical as our intention is to address challenges that we have encountered in the design and statistical analysis of assay validation studies. There are several noteworthy features which render the approach particularly useful in practice. It employs a statistical experimental design approach to the investigation of assay ruggedness with respect to manufacturing variability; it makes use of the assay variability results to determine the level of test-run replication necessary to achieve precision compatible with the product specifications; and, it provides a generic approach to assay validation. With combination vaccines, as with other pharmaceuticals, the analytical methods for release and stability must be validated early in the development programme Several things, though, distinguish this task with combination vaccines: (1) assays are typically pre-existing and often have been validated for use with an established sample matrix, e.g. a monovalent formulation; (2) sample matrices are complex and therefore more subject to manufacturing variability and more likely to cause assay interferences; and (3) the analytical workload is considerable due to the number of antigens. The methodology presented here was developed jointly by Merck Research Laboratories (West Point, PA) and Pasteur Mérieux Connaught, Inc. (Swiftwater, PA). Many of the issues discussed here have application outside of combination vaccines and are common features of all assay validations.

Biological Assay↗
PubMed1985

[Validity of the Eppendorf Mood-Drive Scale].

The paper examines the validity of the Eppendorfer Mood and Drive Scale (ESTA III). ESTA III is a self-rating instrument for evaluating the effect of therapy and for studying the course of affective psychoses. Empirical research on the validity of the scale has been carried out solely by the author of the test. Subsequent to a critical review of hitherto existing research on the validity of the instrument, our own validity studies are discussed. Our studies cast doubt on the concurrent validity of the instrument (comparison with the adjective check list/EWL-K). Analysis of our own data and Reanalysis of the data published by the author of ESTA III do not support the construct validity of the instrument.

Bipolar Disorder↗
PubMed1994

A proposal for scientific validation of instruments for indirect blood pressure measurement at rest, during exercise, and in critical care.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to provide a critical review and comprehensive outline of published guidelines for the validation of monitors for indirect blood pressure (BP) measurement in light of recent research and practical clinical experience. METHODS: Studies testing the reliability and validity of BP monitors and available guidelines for validation have been reviewed and compared. RESULTS: The validation studies of instruments for indirect BP measurement have used a wide variety of sample pools, BP ranges, protocols, reference instruments, and statistical procedures, thereby making it impossible to reach a consensus. Few existing recommendations for validation have been found to be incomplete with respect to BP in various physiological states, sequence of procedures, sample, and statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A new sequence of procedures for validation, including assessment of instruments during exercise and in critical care, is introduced. Previously suggested sample sizes for study subjects, age, and BP groups, as well as margins of error, are statistically challenged. Insufficiency of linear relationship and aggregate agreement alone in determining the interchangeability between a reference and test instrument is demonstrated by quantification of agreement.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Reliability and validity of the Functional Rating Index in older people with low back pain: preliminary report.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Functional Rating Index (FRI) was developed to provide an assessment instrument which has not only clinical usefulness but also quantifies the patient's current state of pain and dysfunction in a reliable and valid manner for spinal conditions. There is no study on the FRI applied to older people with low back pain (LBP). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the FRI in older people with LBP. METHODS: A total of 76 subjects aged 65 to 90 years with LBP, of which 37 were cognitively intact and were followed up on a second occasion, were assessed by the FRI, numeric rating scale (NRS), Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ) and spinal movement test. Reliability was assessed by statistical analysis of test results for test-retest and internal consistency. To assess construct validity, the FRI was compared with the RMQ. Concurrent validity was assessed using the NRS and spinal mobility test. RESULTS: The FRI demonstrated high internal consistency, with alpha=0.921 for test and alpha=0.901 for retest. Item-scale correlations were between 0.549-0.871. Test-retest correlation was 0.913 (p=0.000). There was very good construct validity between the FRI and the RMQ for test (r=0.663, p<0.000) and retest (r=0.603, p<0.000). The FRI showed high correlation with the NRS (r=0.701, p<0.000 for test; r=0.743, p<0.000 for retest) and no correlation with the spinal movement test (r=0.173, p=0.307 for test; r=0.024, p=0.888 for retest). CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary report, the FRI appears to be easy to administer, seems to have significant validity and reliability, and may be useful in geriatric assessment of older people with LBP.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Differential validity of informant-based diagnoses of dementia and depression in index subjects and in their first-degree relatives.

There is no study indicating that informant-derived information on dementia and depression (i.e. family history information) is equivalently valid for first-degree relatives and for index subjects (i.e. patients and control subjects). However, this unproven assumption is the basis for the frequent, possibly inappropriate, use of instruments validated for patients and control subjects in family studies which focus on frequencies of psychiatric disorders in first-degree relatives. Consequently, there is a need to compare the validity of family history information for both disorders in index subjects and their first-degree relatives. Validity was assessed by comparison of family history information for dementia and depression with interview-derived diagnoses in 75 index subjects and 195 age-matched first-degree relatives. The validity of informant-derived information varied for different disorders, i.e. dementia and depression, and different samples, i.e. index subjects and first-degree relatives. In agreement with the study hypothesis, the sensitivity of surrogate information on dementia was significantly reduced in first-degree relatives in comparison with index subjects. In contrast, the sensitivity to detect depression was equivalent in subjects and in relatives. The results indicate the necessity to assess the validity of the psychiatric diagnoses of interest in the sample of interest, e.g. dementia or depression in first-degree relatives of patients and of control subjects. Observations in selected samples, i.e. subjects treated, hospitalised and/or autopsied, cannot be generalised to first-degree relatives in family studies.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

The Psychiatric Care Satisfaction Questionnaire: a reliability and validity study.

Patient satisfaction can be a useful marker in evaluating the quality of psychiatric care. However, this form of measurement has been hampered by the lack of attention paid to the psychometric properties of instruments devised. The Psychiatric Care Satisfaction Questionnaire (PCSQ) was developed and tests of acceptability, validity and reliability were undertaken using 52 inpatients. Content validity was assessed by surveying psychiatrists, other mental health professionals, MIND workers and patient groups. Thirty-six (67.9%) of all mental health professionals felt that the questionnaire was a useful measure of patients' satisfaction with their care, and many comments also suggested high consensual validity. In terms of content validity, responses from patient groups indicated that the majority (63.6%) felt it to be a useful measure of patient satisfaction and 70.5% felt all the areas covered were important. Concurrent and criterion validity were also good, with high correlations with existing scales and with those on a section being significantly less satisfied on the PCSQ (F = 13.3, P = 0.0004). Test-retest reliability was adequate (Cohen's kappa 0.48-0.80) and the internal consistency of the PCSQ was good, at 0.82 (Cronbach's alpha). The PCSQ performed well in all aspects of validity and reliability, indicating that it has good psychometric properties and can be a useful tool for measuring patient satisfaction. However, there remains the need to analyse more closely the concept of satisfaction and its determinants.

Humans↗
PubMed2004

The validity of trans-esophageal Doppler ultrasonography as a measure of cardiac output in critically ill adults.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity of the esophageal Doppler monitor (EDM) and echo-esophageal Doppler (Echo-ED) in measuring cardiac output in the critically ill. DESIGN: Systematic search of relevant international literature and data synthesis. SEARCH STRATEGY: Literature search (1989-2003) using Ovid interface to Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases aimed at finding studies comparing EDM or Echo-ED cardiac output with that derived from simultaneous pulmonary artery thermodilution (PAC(TD)) with Bland Altman measures of validity. PATIENTS: Critically ill adults in operating departments or intensive care units. DATA SYNTHESIS: Summary validity measures synthesized from Bland Altman analyses included pooled median bias and the median percentage of clinical agreement (PCA) derived from the limits of agreement. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven validation papers for EDM (21 studies) involving 314 patients and 2,400 paired measurements. The pooled median bias for PAC(TD) versus EDM was 0.19 l/min (range -0.69 to 2.00 l/min) for cardiac output (16 studies), and 0.6% (range 0-2.3%) for changes in cardiac output (5 studies). The pooled median percentage of clinical agreement for PAC(TD) versus EDM was 52% (interquartile range 42-69%) for cardiac output and 86% (interquartile range 55-93%) for changes in cardiac output. These differences in PCA were significant ( p=0.03 Mann-Whitney) for bolus PAC(TD) as the clinical "gold standard". We found an insufficient number of studies (2 papers) to assess the validity of Echo-ED. CONCLUSIONS: The esophageal Doppler monitor has high validity (no bias and high clinical agreement with pulmonary artery thermodilution) for monitoring changes in cardiac output.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Toward a model of drug relapse: an assessment of the validity of the reinstatement procedure.

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: The reinstatement model is widely used to study relapse to drug addiction. However, the model's validity is open to question. OBJECTIVE: We assess the reinstatement model in terms of criterion and construct validity. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We find that the reinstatement model has adequate criterion validity in the broad sense of the term, as evidenced by the fact that reinstatement in laboratory animals is induced by conditions reported to provoke relapse in humans. The model's criterion validity in the narrower sense, as a medication screen, seems promising for relapse to heroin, nicotine, and alcohol. For relapse to cocaine, criterion validity has not yet been established primarily because clinical studies have examined medication's effects on reductions in cocaine intake rather than relapse during abstinence. The model's construct validity faces more substantial challenges and is yet to be established, but we argue that some of the criticisms of the model in this regard may have been overstated.

Alcoholism↗
PubMed2004

Reliability and validity of Functional Capacity Evaluation methods: a systematic review with reference to Blankenship system, Ergos work simulator, Ergo-Kit and Isernhagen work system.

OBJECTIVES: Functional Capacity Evaluation methods (FCE) claim to measure the functional physical ability of a person to perform work-related tasks. The purpose of the present study was to systematically review the literature on the reliability and validity of four FCEs: the Blankenship system (BS), the ERGOS work simulator (EWS), the Ergo-Kit (EK) and the Isernhagen work system (IWS). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in five databases (CINAHL, Medline, Embase, OSH-ROM and Picarta) using the following keywords and their synonyms: functional capacity evaluation, reliability and validity. The search strategy was performed for relevance in titles and abstracts, and the databases were limited to literature published between 1980 and April 2004. Two independent reviewers applied the inclusion criteria to select all relevant articles and evaluated the methodological quality of all included articles. RESULTS: The search resulted in 77 potential relevant references but only 12 papers were identified for inclusion and assessed for their methodological quality. The interrater reliability and predictive validity of the IWS were evaluated as good while the procedure used in the intrarater reliability (test-retest) studies was not rigorous enough to allow any conclusion. The concurrent validity of the EWS and EK was not demonstrated while no study was found on their reliability. No study was found on the reliability and validity of the BS. CONCLUSIONS: More rigorous studies are needed to demonstrate the reliability and the validity of FCE methods, especially the BS, EWS and EK.

Humans↗
PubMed2005

Construct and face validity of MIST-VR, Endotower, and CELTS: are we ready for skills assessment using simulators?

BACKGROUND: Video trainers may best offer visually realistic laparoscopic simulation, whereas virtual reality (VR) modules may best provide multidimensional objective measures of performance. This study compares the construct and face validity of three different laparoscopic simulators. METHODS: Subjects were voluntarily enrolled at the Learning Center during the 2004 SAGES annual meeting. Each subject completed two repetitions of a single task on each of three simulators, MIST-VR, Endotower, and CELTS; performance scores were automatically generated and recorded. Scores of individuals with various levels of experience were compared to determine construct validity for each simulator. Experience was defined according to four parameters: (a) PGY level, (b) fellowship training, (c) basic laparoscopic cases, and (d) advanced laparoscopic cases. Subjects rated each simulator regarding six face validity (realism of simulation) parameters using a 10-point Likert scale (10 = best rating) and participant scores were compared to previously established expert scores (proficiency goals for training). RESULTS: Ninety-one attendees completed the study. Construct validity was demonstrated for all three simulators; significant differences in scores were detected according to one parameter for MIST-VR, two parameters for Endotower, and all four parameters for CELTS. Face validity was rated as good to excellent for all three simulators (7.0 +/- 0.3 for MIST-VR, 7.9 +/- 0.3 for Endotower [p < 0.001 vs MIST-VR], and 8.7 +/- 0.1 for CELTS [p = 0.001 vs MIST-VR, p = 0.01 vs Endotower]); 6%, 0%, and 36% of "expert" participants obtained expert scores on MIST-VR, Endotower, and CELTS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: All three simulators demonstrated significant construct and reasonable face validity. Although virtual reality holds great promise to expand the scope of laparoscopic simulation, current interfaces may limit their utility for assessment. Computer-enhanced video trainers may offer an improved interface while incorporating useful multidimensional metrics. Further work is needed to establish standards for appropriate skills assessment methods and performance levels using simulators.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire.

Our aim was to validate a culturally adapted, Tunisian-language version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), which is a reliable evaluation instrument for low-back-pain disability. A total of 62 patients with low back pain were assessed by the questionnaire. Reliability for the 1-week test/re-test was assessed by a construction of a Bland Altman plot. Internal construct validity was assessed by Cronbach's alphatest. External construct validity was assessed by association with pain, the Schober test and the General Function Score. Sensitivity to change was determined using a t-test for paired data to compare RMDQ scores at inclusion and at completion of the therapeutic sequence of local corticosteroid injections. We also compared the questionnaire score with the General Function Score, both taken after completion of the therapeutic sequence. The constructed Bland Altman plot showed good reliability. Internal consistency of the RMDQ was found to be very good and the Cronbach's alpha test was 0.94, indicating a good internal construct validity. The questionnaire is correlated with the pain visual analogue scale (r=33; p=0.0001), with the Schober test (r=0.27; p=0.0001) and the General Function Score (r=56; p=0.0001) indicating an adequate external construct validity. The RMDQ administered after the therapeutic sequence is sensitive to change (r=0.83; p=0.000). Comparison of the questionnaire score to the General Function Score, after completion of the therapeutic sequence, was satisfactory (r=0.75; p=0.000). We conclude that the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire has good reliability and internal consistency. Furthermore, it has a good internal- and external construct validity and high sensitivity to change. It is an adequate and useful tool for assessing low-back-pain disability.

Disability Evaluation↗
PubMed2006

Danish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Part 1: Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity in two different populations.

Over the past 10 years, a plethora of back-specific patient-orientated outcome measures have appeared in the literature. Standardisation has been advocated by an expert panel of researchers proposing a core set of instruments. Of the condition-specific questionnaires the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is recommended for use with low back pain (LBP) patients. To date, no Danish version of the ODI exists which has been cross-culturally adapted, validated and published in the peer-reviewed literature. A cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the ODI for the Danish language was carried out according to established guidelines: 233 patients [half of the patients were seen in the primary sector (PrS) and half in the secondary sector (SeS) of the Danish health care system] with LBP and/or leg pain completed a questionnaire booklet at baseline, 1 day or 1 week and 8 weeks follow-up. The booklet contained the Danish version of the ODI, along with the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, the LBP Rating Scale, the SF36 (physical function and bodily pain scales) and a global pain rating. For the ODI test-retest analysis (93 stable patients) resulted in an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.91, a mean difference of 0.8 and 95% limits of agreements of - 11.5 to + 13. Thus, a worsening greater than 12 points and improvement greater than 13 points can be considered a "real" change above the measurement error. A substantial floor effect was found in PrS patients (14.1%). The ODI showed satisfactory cross-sectional discriminant validity when compared to the external measures. Concurrent validity of the ODI revealed: (a) a 10% and 21% lower ODI score compared to the disability and pain measures, respectively, (b) a poorer differentiation of patient disabilities and (c) an acceptable individual ODI score level compared to the external measures. Longitudinal external construct validity showed moderate correlations (range 0.56-0.78). We conclude that the Danish version of the ODI is both a valid and reliable outcome instrument in two LBP patient populations. The ODI is probably most appropriate for use in SeS patients.

Adolescent↗