The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Evaluation Form in a Preadolescent Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form is a knee-specific instrument composed of 18 questions. It is commonly used in adult and pediatric studies as a surgical outcome measure. Normative data exist for an adult population, but there have been no published normative results for younger subjects. PURPOSE: To compile and report pilot normative International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form scores in a preadolescent population. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form was administered to 146 seventh-grade students (aged 12-14 years) at 2 local schools. The form was administered in its original format. Demographic and descriptive results were compiled. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five completed responses were eligible for analysis. The mean age was 13.2 years (SD, 0.5; range, 12.2-14.2 years); 15% of participants had a history of knee injury or pain. The mean International Knee Documentation Committee score for all respondents was 89.4 (SD, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 87.6-91.3; range, 52-100). CONCLUSION: This study provides pilot normative data for mean International Knee Documentation Committee scores in a preadolescent population. The mean score in this younger cohort is consistent with normative data of adults age 35 years or younger. Although the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form is often used in adolescent surgical studies, its validity in these populations remains to be established. Further work to establish the psychometric properties of the current form in younger age groups would be of significant benefit to clinicians.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".