| Title |
Prediction models of health-related quality of life in different neck pain conditions: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s162702 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hector Beltran-Alacreu, Ibai López-de-Uralde-Villanueva, César Calvo-Lobo, Roy La Touche, Roberto Cano-de-la-Cuerda, Alfonso Gil-Martínez, David Fernández-Ayuso, Josué Fernández-Carnero |
| Abstract |
The main aim of the study was to predict the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) based on physical, functional, and psychological measures in patients with different types of neck pain (NP). This cross-sectional study included 202 patients from a primary health center and the physiotherapy outpatient department of a hospital. Patients were divided into four groups according to their NP characteristics: chronic (CNP), acute whiplash (WHIP), chronic NP associated with temporomandibular dysfunction (NP-TMD), or chronic NP associated with chronic primary headache (NP-PH). The following measures were performed: Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12), Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analog scale (VAS), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BECK), and cervical range of movement (CROM). The regression models based on the SF-12 total HRQoL for CNP and NP-TMD groups showed that only NDI was a significant predictor of the worst HRQoL (48.9% and 48.4% of the variance, respectively). In the WHIP group, the regression model showed that BECK was the only significant predictor variable for the worst HRQoL (31.7% of the variance). Finally, in the NP-PH group, the regression showed that the BECK, STAI, and VAS model predicted the worst HRQoL (75.1% of the variance). Chronic nonspecific NP and chronic NP associated with temporomandibular dysfunction were the main predictors of neck disability. In addition, depression, anxiety, and pain were the main predictors of WHIP or primary headache associated with CNP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Researcher | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 23% |
| Unknown | 39 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 46 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#721
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,367
of 339,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#18
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.