Comparative, validity and responsiveness of the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS to the WOMAC physical function subscale in total joint replacement for Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the internal consistency of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form (HOOS-PS) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form (KOOS-PS) in total hip replacement (THR) and total knee (TKR) replacement. Construct validity and responsiveness were compared to the Western Ontario McMaster Universities' Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Likert 3.0 physical function (PF) subscale and the PF excluding the items in the short measures (PF-exclusions). METHODS: Participants completed the full HOOS or KOOS, measures of fatigue, anxiety, depression and the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) pre-surgery and the HOOS or KOOS 6 months post-surgery. Internal consistency for the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS was calculated using Cronbach's alpha. For construct validity, it was hypothesized that correlations between the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS and PF and PF-exclusions with fatigue, CPG, anxiety and depression and HOOS/KOOS pain scales would differ by magnitudes of <0.1. Standardized response means (SRMs) were calculated for the HOOS-PS, KOOS-PS, PF and PF-exclusions and hypothesized to be >1. RESULTS: The THR group (n=201) had a mean age of 62.3 years; 53.2% were female. The TKR group (n=248) had a mean age of 64.5 years; 63.7% were female. Cronbach's alpha was 0.79 and 0.89 for the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS, respectively, confirming that the measures represented a homogeneous construct. The correlation of the HOOS-PS to the PF and PF-exclusions was 0.90 and 0.86, respectively; r=0.90 (PF) and r=0.85 (PF-exclusions) for the KOOS-PS. The results supported the construct validity hypotheses. For THR, the SRM was 1.5, 1.7 and 1.7 for the HOOS-PS, PF and PF-exclusions; for TKR, the SRM was 1.4, 1.5 and 1.7, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The short HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS represent homogenous short measures of PF with similar construct validity and responsiveness to the 17-item PF. The HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS are parsimonious, valid and responsive for evaluating PF in THR and TKR.
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 | 0.014 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".