Interpreting Change Scores for Pain and Functional Status in Low Back Pain: Towards International Consensus Regarding Minimal Important Change

By R. Ostelo, R. Deyo, P. Stratford, Gordon Waddell, Peter Croft, Michael Von Korff, Lex M. Bouter, HC de Vet. Spine, 2008

1,934 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Occupational Therapy, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Pharmacology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c63b17f341638e994cd27cc6d09b4f05e220d5cc

How researchers see this paper

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

In Occupational Therapy

1. R. Chou
2. M. V. van Tulder

In Pathology and Forensic Medicine

1. R. Chou
2. R. Deyo
3. M. V. van Tulder

In Pharmacology

1. R. Chou
2. R. Deyo
3. D. Dowell
4. Tamara M. Haegerich
5. M. V. van Tulder

Citations in the corpus

• CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain (2016, background): “Clinically meaningful improvement has been defined as a 30% improvement in scores for both pain and function (150).”
• 2009 Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group (2009, background): “At present, there is consensus regarding minimal clinically important changes for pain and function in back pain.(59) Authors are”
• Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline (2017, methodology): “One trial found that compared with usual care, Iyengar yoga was associated with lower pain scores (24 vs. 37 on a visual analogue scale [VAS] of 0 to 100; P < 0.001) and better function (18 vs. 21 on the 0- to 100- point Oswestry Disability Index; P < 0.01) at 24 weeks (40).”