Table 4 Hypothesis testing; correlations between questionnaires and know group differences
A priori hypothesis | Scales or Groups (N = number of participants) | PFActS-C-DLV (rs), significance level | Hypothesis Confirmed (yes / no) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1. The PFActS-C has a moderate to strong correlation (r > 0.5) with the TSK and FABQ | TSK (N = 122) FABQ (N = 123) | 0.528, p < .001 0.516, p < .001 | yes | |
2. The PFActS-C correlates stronger (correlation coefficient at least 0.1 higher) with the FABQ-pa than with FABQ-w | FABQ-pa (N = 123) FABQ-w (N = 123) | 0.540, p < .001 0.367, p < .001 | yes | |
3. The PFActS-C DLV correlates stronger (correlation coefficient at least 0.1 higher) with the TSK Scale and the FABQ-pa than with the NDI, the NPRS-av and the NPRS-max scores | NDI (N = 123) NPRS-av (N = 123) NPRS-max (N = 123) | 0.488, p < .001 0.389, p < .001 0.300, p = .001 | no | |
4. The PFActS-C has no significant correlation with age | Age (N = 123) | −0.069, p = .448 (ns) | yes | |
Median, IQR | Sign. Level | |||
5. The PFActS-C-DLV score is significant higher in participants who reported a (mechanical) trauma in their history than in participants who reported a gradual onset of pain | Gradual onset group (N = 88) Mechanical trauma group (N = 24) | Mdn = 52.5, IQR = 89 Mdn = 107.0, IQR = 78 | p = .006 | yes |