CROSS-CULTURAL VALIDATED ADAPTATION OF DYSFUNCTIONAL VOIDING SYMPTOM SCORE (DVSS) TO JAPANESE LANGUAGE AND COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS IN QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PEDIATRIC PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Validated questionnaire for evaluation of pediatric lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is of a great need. We performed cross-cultural validated adaptation of Dysfunctional Voiding Symptom Score (DVSS) to Japanese language, and assessed whether children understand and respond to questionnaire correctly, using cognitive linguistic approach. METHODS: We translated DVSS into two Japanese versions according to a standard validation methodology: translation, synthesis, back-translation, expert review, and pre-testing. One version was written in adult language for parents, and the other was written in child language for children. Pre-testing was done with 5 to 15-year-old patients visiting us, having normal intelligence. A specialist in cognitive linguistics observed the response by children and parents to DVSS as an interviewer. When a child could not understand a question without adding or paraphrasing the question by the parents, it was defined as 'misidentification'. RESULTS: We performed pretesting with 2 trial versions of DVSS before having the final version. The pre-testing for the first trial version was done for 32 patients (male to female ratio was 19 : 13). The pre-testing for the second trial version was done for 11 patients (male to female ratio was 8 : 3). In DVSS in child language, misidentification was consistently observed for representation of time or frequency. We completed the formal validated translation by amending the problems raised in the pre-testing. CONCLUSION: The cross-cultural validated adaptation of DVSS to child and adult Japanese was completed. Since temporal perception is not fully developed in children, caution should be taken for using the terms related with time or frequency in the questionnaires for children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".