Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(11)
For category#1 (orthopedic conditions), the following tests were administered to patients: Visual analog pain scale plus, knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score, WOMAC Score, Hip injury and osteoarthritis outcome score, disability arm shoulder hand score, foot and ankle outcomes questionnaire, oswestry back questionnaire, neck disability index.
The Maine Seattle Back Questionnaire (MSBQ) was the main outcome measure [ 27].
The survey incorporated the Nordic back questionnaire, questions on common risks for LBP, and purpose-built questions regarding educational exposures.
The STarT Back Questionnaire was completed by BBPS patients in information sessions, to help the BBPS Team guide participants towards the most appropriate BBPS interventions.
A Norwegian prospective observational multicentre cohort study used the Maine Seattle Back Questionnaire, which is equivalent to the ODI, as the primary outcome measure [ 7].
The STarT Back Questionnaire [ 31] was designed to identify patients most at risk of developing persistent low back pain, in order to aid decision making and target treatment more effectively.
Similar(49)
Six out of ten of the reviewed questionnaires were modified low back questionnaires.
An industrial hygienist reviewed occupational histories in the completed questionnaire and selected follow back questionnaires that were sent to the respondents, and answers obtained by telephone.
After 3 months we received back questionnaires from 69% of the HG and 68% of the CG and after 12 months from 56% of the HG and 57% of the CG.
A self-administered mail-back questionnaire was developed and distributed to 322 households using a multistage cluster sampling strategy; 179 questionnaires were returned (55.6%).
This well-established design uses a self-administered, mail-back questionnaire, coupled with motivation by post and telephone to encourage high response rates (typically between 60% and 80%) helping to provide reliable data on mobility behaviour.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com