Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries

Research prior to 1995 showed a diversity of either inclusion or exclusion criteria (or both) for diagnosing whiplash injury. As a consequence, the Quebec Task Force (QTF) developed expert-based criteria, which may be considered as a the ‘new’ gold standard. Here, we examined the inclusion criteria...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Injury 2001-04, Vol.32 (3), p.185-193
Hauptverfasser: Versteegen, G.J, van Es, F.D, Kingma, J, Meijler, W.J, ten Duis, H.J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 193
container_issue 3
container_start_page 185
container_title Injury
container_volume 32
creator Versteegen, G.J
van Es, F.D
Kingma, J
Meijler, W.J
ten Duis, H.J
description Research prior to 1995 showed a diversity of either inclusion or exclusion criteria (or both) for diagnosing whiplash injury. As a consequence, the Quebec Task Force (QTF) developed expert-based criteria, which may be considered as a the ‘new’ gold standard. Here, we examined the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria used in research populations from the major 82 research studies performed during the period 1980–1998, comparing their similarities and dissimilarities to the QTF standard. None of the articles satisfied the QTF definitions completely, either before or after their introduction in 1995. Nevertheless, the QTF still seems to have had some impact on either the published inclusion or exclusion criteria. We observed that both sets of criteria showed a qualitative shift following the QTF publication in 1995. For the inclusion criteria, we found both a statistically significant increase in use of the QTF definition (acceleration-deceleration mechanism, rear-end collision, motor vehicle collision or other mishaps) and in the criterion ‘neck pain’. We also observed some smaller changes in both inclusion and exclusion criteria but none of these was significant statistically.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0020-1383(00)00180-7
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70676419</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0020138300001807</els_id><sourcerecordid>70676419</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-f7445482b97bf631faee35751a88a9a4daac187e01da0a3a99e2c086252e32f03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQQK0K1C6Fn1BkCamCQ8rYTuL4VFUVBaRKqKKczawz7rpkk9ROQP33ON1VOXIaaebN12PsRMCZAFF__A4goRCqUe8BPgCIBgp9wFai0aYAWesXbPWMHLFXKd1nSINSh-xICFmCNGrFfl6MY_cY-js-bYjfzLQmx28x_eJXQ3TEXQwTxYAcE0fuI26JD55H8hSpz4AfIk_T3AZKS-HPJowdpg0P_f0cc_I1e-mxS_RmH4_Zj6tPt5dfiutvn79eXlwXTjVmKrwuy6ps5Nrota-V8EikKl0JbBo0WLaILr9GIFoEVGgMSQdNLStJSnpQx-x0N3eMw8NMabLbkBx1HfY0zMlqqHVdCpPBage6OKSUH7FjDFuMj1aAXdTaJ7V28WYB7JNaq3Pf2_2Ceb2l9l_X3mUG3u0BTA677Kp3IT1zppSVXsac7yjKMn4Hija5sJhsQyQ32XYI_znkL40ZlJ4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>70676419</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Versteegen, G.J ; van Es, F.D ; Kingma, J ; Meijler, W.J ; ten Duis, H.J</creator><creatorcontrib>Versteegen, G.J ; van Es, F.D ; Kingma, J ; Meijler, W.J ; ten Duis, H.J</creatorcontrib><description>Research prior to 1995 showed a diversity of either inclusion or exclusion criteria (or both) for diagnosing whiplash injury. As a consequence, the Quebec Task Force (QTF) developed expert-based criteria, which may be considered as a the ‘new’ gold standard. Here, we examined the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria used in research populations from the major 82 research studies performed during the period 1980–1998, comparing their similarities and dissimilarities to the QTF standard. None of the articles satisfied the QTF definitions completely, either before or after their introduction in 1995. Nevertheless, the QTF still seems to have had some impact on either the published inclusion or exclusion criteria. We observed that both sets of criteria showed a qualitative shift following the QTF publication in 1995. For the inclusion criteria, we found both a statistically significant increase in use of the QTF definition (acceleration-deceleration mechanism, rear-end collision, motor vehicle collision or other mishaps) and in the criterion ‘neck pain’. We also observed some smaller changes in both inclusion and exclusion criteria but none of these was significant statistically.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-1383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0267</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0020-1383(00)00180-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11240293</identifier><identifier>CODEN: INJUBF</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Cervical Vertebrae - injuries ; Humans ; Injuries of the limb. Injuries of the spine ; Injury Severity Score ; Medical sciences ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Reference Standards ; Spinal Fractures - diagnosis ; Terminology as Topic ; Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents ; Whiplash Injuries - diagnosis</subject><ispartof>Injury, 2001-04, Vol.32 (3), p.185-193</ispartof><rights>2001 Elsevier Science Ltd</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-f7445482b97bf631faee35751a88a9a4daac187e01da0a3a99e2c086252e32f03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-f7445482b97bf631faee35751a88a9a4daac187e01da0a3a99e2c086252e32f03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138300001807$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=942577$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11240293$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Versteegen, G.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Es, F.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kingma, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meijler, W.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ten Duis, H.J</creatorcontrib><title>Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries</title><title>Injury</title><addtitle>Injury</addtitle><description>Research prior to 1995 showed a diversity of either inclusion or exclusion criteria (or both) for diagnosing whiplash injury. As a consequence, the Quebec Task Force (QTF) developed expert-based criteria, which may be considered as a the ‘new’ gold standard. Here, we examined the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria used in research populations from the major 82 research studies performed during the period 1980–1998, comparing their similarities and dissimilarities to the QTF standard. None of the articles satisfied the QTF definitions completely, either before or after their introduction in 1995. Nevertheless, the QTF still seems to have had some impact on either the published inclusion or exclusion criteria. We observed that both sets of criteria showed a qualitative shift following the QTF publication in 1995. For the inclusion criteria, we found both a statistically significant increase in use of the QTF definition (acceleration-deceleration mechanism, rear-end collision, motor vehicle collision or other mishaps) and in the criterion ‘neck pain’. We also observed some smaller changes in both inclusion and exclusion criteria but none of these was significant statistically.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cervical Vertebrae - injuries</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Injuries of the limb. Injuries of the spine</subject><subject>Injury Severity Score</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Reference Standards</subject><subject>Spinal Fractures - diagnosis</subject><subject>Terminology as Topic</subject><subject>Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents</subject><subject>Whiplash Injuries - diagnosis</subject><issn>0020-1383</issn><issn>1879-0267</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQQK0K1C6Fn1BkCamCQ8rYTuL4VFUVBaRKqKKczawz7rpkk9ROQP33ON1VOXIaaebN12PsRMCZAFF__A4goRCqUe8BPgCIBgp9wFai0aYAWesXbPWMHLFXKd1nSINSh-xICFmCNGrFfl6MY_cY-js-bYjfzLQmx28x_eJXQ3TEXQwTxYAcE0fuI26JD55H8hSpz4AfIk_T3AZKS-HPJowdpg0P_f0cc_I1e-mxS_RmH4_Zj6tPt5dfiutvn79eXlwXTjVmKrwuy6ps5Nrota-V8EikKl0JbBo0WLaILr9GIFoEVGgMSQdNLStJSnpQx-x0N3eMw8NMabLbkBx1HfY0zMlqqHVdCpPBage6OKSUH7FjDFuMj1aAXdTaJ7V28WYB7JNaq3Pf2_2Ceb2l9l_X3mUG3u0BTA677Kp3IT1zppSVXsac7yjKMn4Hija5sJhsQyQ32XYI_znkL40ZlJ4</recordid><startdate>20010401</startdate><enddate>20010401</enddate><creator>Versteegen, G.J</creator><creator>van Es, F.D</creator><creator>Kingma, J</creator><creator>Meijler, W.J</creator><creator>ten Duis, H.J</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010401</creationdate><title>Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries</title><author>Versteegen, G.J ; van Es, F.D ; Kingma, J ; Meijler, W.J ; ten Duis, H.J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-f7445482b97bf631faee35751a88a9a4daac187e01da0a3a99e2c086252e32f03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cervical Vertebrae - injuries</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Injuries of the limb. Injuries of the spine</topic><topic>Injury Severity Score</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Reference Standards</topic><topic>Spinal Fractures - diagnosis</topic><topic>Terminology as Topic</topic><topic>Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents</topic><topic>Whiplash Injuries - diagnosis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Versteegen, G.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Es, F.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kingma, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meijler, W.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ten Duis, H.J</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Injury</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Versteegen, G.J</au><au>van Es, F.D</au><au>Kingma, J</au><au>Meijler, W.J</au><au>ten Duis, H.J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries</atitle><jtitle>Injury</jtitle><addtitle>Injury</addtitle><date>2001-04-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>185</spage><epage>193</epage><pages>185-193</pages><issn>0020-1383</issn><eissn>1879-0267</eissn><coden>INJUBF</coden><abstract>Research prior to 1995 showed a diversity of either inclusion or exclusion criteria (or both) for diagnosing whiplash injury. As a consequence, the Quebec Task Force (QTF) developed expert-based criteria, which may be considered as a the ‘new’ gold standard. Here, we examined the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria used in research populations from the major 82 research studies performed during the period 1980–1998, comparing their similarities and dissimilarities to the QTF standard. None of the articles satisfied the QTF definitions completely, either before or after their introduction in 1995. Nevertheless, the QTF still seems to have had some impact on either the published inclusion or exclusion criteria. We observed that both sets of criteria showed a qualitative shift following the QTF publication in 1995. For the inclusion criteria, we found both a statistically significant increase in use of the QTF definition (acceleration-deceleration mechanism, rear-end collision, motor vehicle collision or other mishaps) and in the criterion ‘neck pain’. We also observed some smaller changes in both inclusion and exclusion criteria but none of these was significant statistically.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>11240293</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0020-1383(00)00180-7</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-1383
ispartof Injury, 2001-04, Vol.32 (3), p.185-193
issn 0020-1383
1879-0267
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70676419
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Cervical Vertebrae - injuries
Humans
Injuries of the limb. Injuries of the spine
Injury Severity Score
Medical sciences
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Reference Standards
Spinal Fractures - diagnosis
Terminology as Topic
Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents
Whiplash Injuries - diagnosis
title Applying the Quebec Task Force criteria as a frame of reference for studies of whiplash injuries
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T16%3A39%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Applying%20the%20Quebec%20Task%20Force%20criteria%20as%20a%20frame%20of%20reference%20for%20studies%20of%20whiplash%20injuries&rft.jtitle=Injury&rft.au=Versteegen,%20G.J&rft.date=2001-04-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=185&rft.epage=193&rft.pages=185-193&rft.issn=0020-1383&rft.eissn=1879-0267&rft.coden=INJUBF&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0020-1383(00)00180-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E70676419%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=70676419&rft_id=info:pmid/11240293&rft_els_id=S0020138300001807&rfr_iscdi=true