Analysis of outcome measures for persons with patellofemoral pain: which are reliable and valid?

By K. Crossley, K. Bennell, S. Cowan, S. Green. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2004

715 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Occupational Therapy, Rheumatology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/974277be307850399ba53cf6c44c9bd53b16c44f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. A. Boonstra
2. H. R. Schiphorst Preuper
3. R. Stewart
4. Amy P. Powell
5. J. Deloach
6. C. Porucznik
7. Michiel Felix Reneman
8. J. B. Posthumus

Citations in the corpus

• Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (2008, methodology): “The VAS is a commonly used assessment instrument for pain intensity in rehabilitation, which has proved to be reliable and valid (Crossley et al., 2004).”
• Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. (2009, background): “MCID and PASS estimates have been determined for visual analog pain scales for a variety of diseases including hip and knee osteoarthritis, patellafemoral pain, generalized rheumatoid arthritis, and mechanical neck pain.(1,2,13,16) For these chronic diseases, MCID estimates varied between 0.”