Translation, Cross-cultural Adaptation, and Psychometric Properties of the German Version of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Clinical measurement. OBJECTIVES: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) from English into German, and to study its psychometric properties in patients after hip surgery. BACKGROUND: There is no specific hip questionnaire in German that not only measures symptoms and function but also contains items about hip-related quality of life. METHODS: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation involved forward translation, harmonization, cognitive debriefing, back translation, and comparison to the original HOOS following international guidelines. The German version was tested in 51 Swiss inpatients 8 weeks after different types of hip surgery, mainly total hip replacement. The mean age of the participants was 62.5 years, and the age range was from 27 to 87 years. Thirty (58.8%) of the participants were women. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were estimated using Cronbach alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients for agreement. For construct validity, total scores of the German HOOS were correlated with those of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. The HOOS was also compared to the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. RESULTS: Cronbach alpha values for all German HOOS subscales were between .87 and .93. For test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient for agreement was 0.85 for the total scores of the German HOOS. The Spearman rho for the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning subscale compared to the sum of all HOOS subscales was 0.71, and that for the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical component summary was 0.97. CONCLUSION: The German HOOS has demonstrated adequate reliability and validity. Use of the German HOOS is recommended for assessment of patients after hip surgery, with the proviso that additional psychometric testing should be done in future research.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".