These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2947907)

  • 1. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance.
    Deyo RA; Centor RM
    J Chronic Dis; 1986; 39(11):897-906. PubMed ID: 2947907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain.
    Grotle M; Brox JI; Vøllestad NK
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Nov; 29(21):E492-501. PubMed ID: 15507789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative validity of the sickness impact profile and shorter scales for functional assessment in low-back pain.
    Deyo RA
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1986 Nov; 11(9):951-4. PubMed ID: 2950601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36.
    Walsh TL; Hanscom B; Lurie JD; Weinstein JN
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Mar; 28(6):607-15. PubMed ID: 12642770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients.
    Lauridsen HH; Hartvigsen J; Manniche C; Korsholm L; Grunnet-Nilsson N
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2006 Oct; 7():82. PubMed ID: 17064410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of internal and external responsiveness of the generic Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) with disease-specific measures in rheumatoid arthritis.
    Veehof MM; ten Klooster PM; Taal E; van Riel PL; van de Laar MA
    J Rheumatol; 2008 Apr; 35(4):610-7. PubMed ID: 18322989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important change of the Pain Disability Index in patients with chronic back pain.
    Soer R; Reneman MF; Vroomen PC; Stegeman P; Coppes MH
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Apr; 37(8):711-5. PubMed ID: 21796022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Responsiveness of common outcome measures for patients with low back pain.
    Taylor SJ; Taylor AE; Foy MA; Fogg AJ
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1999 Sep; 24(17):1805-12. PubMed ID: 10488511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measuring physical and psychosocial function in patients with low-back pain.
    Deyo RA; Diehl AK
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1983 Sep; 8(6):635-42. PubMed ID: 6228020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcome in low back pain.
    Garratt AM; Klaber Moffett J; Farrin AJ
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2001 Jan; 26(1):71-7; discussion 77. PubMed ID: 11148649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation.
    Deyo RA; Diehr P; Patrick DL
    Control Clin Trials; 1991 Aug; 12(4 Suppl):142S-158S. PubMed ID: 1663851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness.
    Davidson M; Keating JL
    Phys Ther; 2002 Jan; 82(1):8-24. PubMed ID: 11784274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reliability and validity of the back performance scale: observing activity limitation in patients with back pain.
    Magnussen L; Strand LI; Lygren H
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Apr; 29(8):903-7. PubMed ID: 15082994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative responsiveness of verbal and numerical rating scales to measure pain intensity in patients with chronic pain.
    Chien CW; Bagraith KS; Khan A; Deen M; Strong J
    J Pain; 2013 Dec; 14(12):1653-62. PubMed ID: 24290445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain.
    Stratford PW; Binkley J; Solomon P; Gill C; Finch E
    Phys Ther; 1994 Jun; 74(6):528-33. PubMed ID: 8197239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Performance of the Angle Labor Pain Questionnaire During Initiation of Epidural Analgesia in Early Active Labor.
    Angle PJ; Kurtz Landy C; Djordjevic J; Barrett J; Kibbe A; Sriparamananthan S; Lee Y; Hamata L; Zaki P; Kiss A
    Anesth Analg; 2016 Dec; 123(6):1546-1553. PubMed ID: 27870739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Construct validity and responsiveness of the single-item presenteeism question in patients with lower back pain for the measurement of presenteeism.
    Kigozi J; Lewis M; Jowett S; Barton P; Coast J
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Mar; 39(5):409-16. PubMed ID: 24365900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessing the responsiveness of measures of oral health-related quality of life.
    Locker D; Jokovic A; Clarke M
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 2004 Feb; 32(1):10-8. PubMed ID: 14961835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
    Parker SL; Adogwa O; Paul AR; Anderson WN; Aaronson O; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 May; 14(5):598-604. PubMed ID: 21332281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Responsiveness of the EQ-5D health-related quality-of-life instrument in assessing low back pain.
    Whynes DK; McCahon RA; Ravenscroft A; Hodgkinson V; Evley R; Hardman JG
    Value Health; 2013; 16(1):124-32. PubMed ID: 23337223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.