Reliability of the Second and Third Iterations of the Sensory-Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire in a Subclinical Neck Pain Population.

IF 2.8 3区医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Brain Sciences Pub Date : 2025-01-14 DOI:10.3390/brainsci15010067

Ushani Ambalavanar, Heidi Haavik, Nitika Kumari, Imran Amjad, Nooshin Khobzi Rotondi, Bernadette Ann Murphy

{"title":"Reliability of the Second and Third Iterations of the Sensory-Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire in a Subclinical Neck Pain Population.","authors":"Ushani Ambalavanar, Heidi Haavik, Nitika Kumari, Imran Amjad, Nooshin Khobzi Rotondi, Bernadette Ann Murphy","doi":"10.3390/brainsci15010067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/objectives: This study aimed to address limitations of the pilot reliability study on the Sensory-Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire (SMD-Q) in two parts. Part 1 evaluated the intra-rater reliability of SMD-Q version 2 (V2). Part 2 addressed V2's limitations before assessing the intra-rater reliability of version 3 (V3). V2 framed questions as \"over the past week\", whereas V3 also framed questions as \"in a typical/usual week\".Methods: The SMD-Q was administered via QualtricsTM at baseline and 4 to 7 days later to subclinical neck pain participants, 51 in part 1 (32 F; mean age ± SD: 21.17 ± 2.66 y) and 27 in part 2 (20 F; mean age ± SD: 21.89 ± 2.81 y). Reliability statistics (quadratic weighted kappa (Kw) and Cronbach's alpha (α)) were calculated for all items (V2) and total scores (V2 and V3).Results: There was excellent agreement for V2 total scores (Kw ≥ 0.75), and V3 total scores for \"in a typical/usual week\" (Kw ≥ 0.75), but fair to good agreement for V3 total scores of \"over the past week\" (0.40 < Kw < 0.75). V2 had acceptable (0.7 ≤ α < 0.8) to good internal consistency (0.8 ≤ α < 0.9), while V3 had good internal consistency for both administrations.Conclusions: Versions 2 and 3 of the SMD-Q appear to reliably capture disordered sensorimotor integration in people with subclinical neck pain, with improved reliability in V3 when questions are framed as \"in a typical/usual week\". However, further research is needed to confirm this finding.","PeriodicalId":9095,"journal":{"name":"Brain Sciences","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11763920/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15010067","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: This study aimed to address limitations of the pilot reliability study on the Sensory-Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire (SMD-Q) in two parts. Part 1 evaluated the intra-rater reliability of SMD-Q version 2 (V2). Part 2 addressed V2's limitations before assessing the intra-rater reliability of version 3 (V3). V2 framed questions as "over the past week", whereas V3 also framed questions as "in a typical/usual week".

Methods: The SMD-Q was administered via Qualtrics^TM at baseline and 4 to 7 days later to subclinical neck pain participants, 51 in part 1 (32 F; mean age ± SD: 21.17 ± 2.66 y) and 27 in part 2 (20 F; mean age ± SD: 21.89 ± 2.81 y). Reliability statistics (quadratic weighted kappa (K_w) and Cronbach's alpha (α)) were calculated for all items (V2) and total scores (V2 and V3).

Results: There was excellent agreement for V2 total scores (K_w ≥ 0.75), and V3 total scores for "in a typical/usual week" (K_w ≥ 0.75), but fair to good agreement for V3 total scores of "over the past week" (0.40 < K_w < 0.75). V2 had acceptable (0.7 ≤ α < 0.8) to good internal consistency (0.8 ≤ α < 0.9), while V3 had good internal consistency for both administrations.

Conclusions: Versions 2 and 3 of the SMD-Q appear to reliably capture disordered sensorimotor integration in people with subclinical neck pain, with improved reliability in V3 when questions are framed as "in a typical/usual week". However, further research is needed to confirm this finding.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

亚临床颈部疼痛人群感觉-运动功能障碍问卷第二次和第三次迭代的可靠性。

背景/目的：本研究旨在通过两部分来解决感觉-运动功能障碍问卷（SMD-Q）初步可靠性研究的局限性。第1部分评估了SMD-Q版本2 （V2）的内部可靠性。第2部分在评估版本3 （V3）的内部可靠性之前讨论了V2的局限性。V2将问题定义为“过去一周”，而V3也将问题定义为“在典型/平常的一周”。方法：在基线和4至7天后，通过QualtricsTM对亚临床颈部疼痛参与者给予SMD-Q，第1部分51例(32 F；平均年龄±SD: 21.17±2.66 y)，第2部分27岁(20岁；平均年龄±SD: 21.89±2.81 y)。对所有项目（V2）和总得分（V2和V3）进行二次加权kappa （Kw）和Cronbach's alpha （α）的信度统计。结果：V2总分（Kw≥0.75）和V3总分在“典型/平常一周”（Kw≥0.75）上的一致性很好，但V3总分在“过去一周”（0.40 < Kw < 0.75）上的一致性很好。V2具有可接受的（0.7≤α < 0.8）到良好的内部一致性（0.8≤α < 0.9），而V3具有良好的内部一致性。结论：SMD-Q的版本2和版本3似乎可靠地捕捉亚临床颈部疼痛患者的感觉运动整合障碍，当问题被设置为“在典型/平常的一周”时，版本3的可靠性得到提高。然而，需要进一步的研究来证实这一发现。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Brain Sciences Neuroscience-General Neuroscience

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

9.10%

发文量

1472

审稿时长

18.71 days

期刊介绍： Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes and short communications in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, molecular and cellular neuroscience, neural engineering, neuroimaging, neurolinguistics, neuropathy, systems neuroscience, and theoretical and computational neuroscience. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.