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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
250 related items for PubMed ID: 18827701
1. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Norwegian versions of the Maine-Seattle Back Questionnaire and the Sciatica Bothersomeness and Frequency Indices. Grøvle L, Haugen AJ, Keller A, Natvig B, Brox JI, Grotle M. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Oct 01; 33(21):2347-53. PubMed ID: 18827701 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Norwegian version of the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia. Haugen AJ, Grøvle L, Keller A, Grotle M. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Aug 01; 33(17):E595-601. PubMed ID: 18670327 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The Maine-Seattle back questionnaire: a 12-item disability questionnaire for evaluating patients with lumbar sciatica or stenosis: results of a derivation and validation cohort analysis. Atlas SJ, Deyo RA, van den Ancker M, Singer DE, Keller RB, Patrick DL. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Aug 15; 28(16):1869-76. PubMed ID: 12923478 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Reliability and construct validity of self-report questionnaires for patients with pelvic girdle pain. Grotle M, Garratt AM, Krogstad Jenssen H, Stuge B. Phys Ther; 2012 Jan 15; 92(1):111-23. PubMed ID: 22016375 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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 15; 28(6):607-15. PubMed ID: 12642770 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliability and validity of Turkish versions of Sciatica Bothersomeness and Sciatica Frequency Index. Sencan S, Sacaklidir R, Gunduz OH. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil; 2022 Mar 15; 35(6):1329-1335. PubMed ID: 35599470 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Development and psychometric testing of Korean language versions of 4 neck pain and disability questionnaires. Lee H, Nicholson LL, Adams RD, Maher CG, Halaki M, Bae SS. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Jul 15; 31(16):1841-5. PubMed ID: 16845361 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation of the Turkish version of the Quebec back pain disability scale for patients with low back pain. Melikoglu MA, Kocabas H, Sezer I, Bilgilisoy M, Tuncer T. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Mar 15; 34(6):E219-24. PubMed ID: 19282728 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Development of the Italian version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI-I): A cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity study. Monticone M, Baiardi P, Ferrari S, Foti C, Mugnai R, Pillastrini P, Vanti C, Zanoli G. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Sep 01; 34(19):2090-5. PubMed ID: 19730216 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The lower-limb tasks questionnaire: an assessment of validity, reliability, responsiveness, and minimal important differences. McNair PJ, Prapavessis H, Collier J, Bassett S, Bryant A, Larmer P. Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2007 Aug 01; 88(8):993-1001. PubMed ID: 17678661 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Psychometric characteristics of the Brazilian-Portuguese versions of the Functional Rating Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Costa LO, Maher CG, Latimer J, Ferreira PH, Pozzi GC, Ribeiro RN. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Aug 01; 32(17):1902-7. PubMed ID: 17762300 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire as an outcome measure: test-retest reliability and responsiveness to change. Strand LI, Ljunggren AE, Bogen B, Ask T, Johnsen TB. Eur J Pain; 2008 Oct 01; 12(7):917-25. PubMed ID: 18289893 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The Upper Limb Functional Index: development and determination of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Gabel CP, Michener LA, Burkett B, Neller A. J Hand Ther; 2006 Oct 01; 19(3):328-48; quiz 349. PubMed ID: 16861132 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the short form 12-item survey (SF-12) in patients with back pain. Luo X, George ML, Kakouras I, Edwards CL, Pietrobon R, Richardson W, Hey L. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Aug 01; 28(15):1739-45. PubMed ID: 12897502 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Validation of the Norwegian version ofHannover Functional Ability Questionnaire. Magnussen LH, Lygren H, Anderson B, Breivik K, Strand LI. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Jun 15; 35(14):E646-53. PubMed ID: 20505564 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinimetric testing of three self-report outcome measures for low back pain patients in Brazil: which one is the best? Costa LO, Maher CG, Latimer J, Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Pozzi GC, Freitas LM. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Oct 15; 33(22):2459-63. PubMed ID: 18923324 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Validity and reliability of the Norwegian version of the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index. Rustøen T, Wiklund I, Hanestad BR, Burckhardt CS. Scand J Caring Sci; 1999 Oct 15; 13(2):96-101. PubMed ID: 10633739 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Responsiveness of pain and disability measures for chronic whiplash. Stewart M, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Bogduk N, Nicholas M. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Mar 01; 32(5):580-5. PubMed ID: 17334294 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of the core outcome measure in whiplash. Rebbeck TJ, Refshauge KM, Maher CG, Stewart M. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Mar 15; 32(6):696-702. PubMed ID: 17413477 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire: methodological aspects of the Norwegian version. Grotle M, Brox JI, Vøllestad NK. J Rehabil Med; 2006 Nov 15; 38(6):346-53. PubMed ID: 17067967 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]