Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale to European Portuguese Language
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing. Objective. To conduct the cross-cultural adaptation of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) and investigate its reliability and validity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Summary of Background Data. The QBPDS is one of the most commonly used scales to evaluate functional incapacity resulting from low back pain. Although measuring disability is an important outcome in physiotherapy care, there is no previous research relating to the cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the QBPDS in the Portuguese-speaking population. Methods. The questionnaire was first translated and back-translated in accordance with the published guidelines. The Portuguese version of the QBPDS was then pilot tested in a Portuguese sample of 40 patients with CLBP. Psychometric properties were evaluated in a new sample of 132 patients with CLBP. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to confirm its unidimensionality. Reliability was evaluated through internal consistency and reproducibility, using the Cronbach α and intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. Construct validity was assessed with correlations between the QBPDS and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and between the QBPDS and the visual analogue pain scale for convergent validity and pain localization for discriminative validity, using the Spearman correlation analysis and the Mann-Whitney test. Results. Exploratory factor analysis revealed the existence of one major factor that explains 52.1% of the variance. One-week test-retest reliability was 0.7, and internal consistency was 0.95. The QBPDS correlated strongly with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (0.62; P < 0.001), moderately with pain (0.38; P < 0.001), and shows capability to discriminate between patients with localized and referred pain (U = 1218; P < 0.0005). Conclusion. The reliability and construct validity of the Portuguese version of the QBPDS are acceptable to assess functional status of Portuguese-speaking patients with CLBP. Level of Evidence: N/A Linguistically and culturally well-adapted and validated questionnaires allow comparison of different research findings worldwide. The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) is one of the most commonly used scales to evaluate functional incapacity resulting from low back pain. The results of this study showed that the Portuguese version of the QBPDS is a simple and fast scale that is quite easy to score and interpret and demonstrates excellent reliability and good construct validity. Therefore, its use can be used in a clinical setting and recommended for future outcome studies in Portuguese-speaking patients with nonspecific low back pain in Portugal.
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 | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".