MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1918095884 · doi:10.3109/09638288.2015.1055380

Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Arabic version of the reduced Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index in patients with knee osteoarthritis

2015· article· en· W1918095884 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmad H. Alghadir, Shahnawaz Anwer, Zaheen A. Iqbal, Hisham Alsanawi

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaPhysical therapyWOMACConstruct validityVisual analogue scaleOsteoarthritisReliability (semiconductor)MedicineOutpatient clinicPsychologyPsychometricsClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We adapted the reduced Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index for the Arabic language and tested its metric properties in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one consecutive patients who were referred for physiotherapy to the outpatient department were asked to answer the Arabic version of the reduced WOMAC index (ArWOMAC). After the completion of the ArWOMAC, the intensity of knee pain and general health status were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), respectively. A second assessment was performed at least 48 h after the first session to assess test-retest reliability. The test-retest reliability was quantified using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and Cronbach's alpha was calculated to assess the internal consistency of the Arabic questionnaire. The construct validity was assessed using Spearman rank correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The total ArWOMAC scale and pain and function subscales were internally consistent with Cronbach's coefficient alpha of 0.91, 0.89 and 0.90, respectively. Test-retest reliability was good to excellent with ICC of 0.91, 0.89 and 0.90, respectively. SF-12 and VAS score significantly correlated with ArWOMAC index (p < 0.01), which support the construct validity. The standard error of measurement (SEM) of the total scale was 2.94, based on repeated measurements for test-retest. The minimum detectable change based on the SEM for test-retest was 8.15. CONCLUSIONS: The ArWOMAC index is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating the severity of knee OA, with metric properties in agreement with the original version. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Although, the reduced WOMAC index has been clinically utilized within the Saudi population, the Arabic version of this instrument is not validated for an Arab population to measure lower limb functional disability caused by OA. The Arabic version of reduced WOMAC (ArWOMAC) index is a reliable and valid scale to measure lower limb functional disability in patients with knee OA. The ArWOMAC index could be suitable in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries where the language, culture and the life style are similar.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207