Translation and preliminary validation of the english version of the DUX questionnaire for lower extremity bone tumor patients (Bt‐DUX): A disease‐specific measure for quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To translate the Dutch DUX questionnaire for lower extremity bone tumor patients (Bt-DUX), a disease-specific quality of life (QoL) instrument, into the English (UK) language and preliminary validate the English version in patients who were treated for lower-extremity bone tumors. METHODS: Adaptation and translation process included forward translation, back-translation, and a review of the back-translation by an expert committee. Internal consistency and validity of the translated questionnaire were examined in a sample of adolescents treated for lower extremity osteosarcoma in the United Kingdom. Assessments included the Bt-DUX, the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS), the Short Form (SF)-36, and the TNO-AZL Questionnaire for Adult's Quality of Life (TAAQOL). RESULTS: Seventeen patients (7 ♂ and 10 ♀), median age 19.9 (range: 16-25) years completed the questionnaires. Mean Bt-DUX score was 38.8 (range: 23-78), with Cronbach's α being 0.95 domain-total correlations ranged between 0.84 and 0.93 (P < 0.01). Spearman's correlation coefficients between the Bt-DUX total and domain scores and corresponding TAAQOL and SF-36 scores were overall moderate to good and reaching statistical significance in a most cases. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence suggests that the English Bt-DUX translation is a valid disease-specific instrument for evaluating QoL of adolescents with lower extremity bone cancer.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".