Reliability and sensitivity measures of the Greek version of the short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The translation of existing healthcare measurement scales is considered a feasible, efficient and popular approach to produce internationally comparable measures. The short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire is one of the most widely used and translated instruments to measure the pain experience. The Greek version of the short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (GR-SFMPQ) has recently been developed and demonstrated satisfactory levels of internal consistency. The objective of the present study was to assess the instrument's reliability and sensitivity.Eighty patients with spinal or knee pain were included. The test-retest reliability of the instrument was estimated for measurements within the same day and after 15 days. The sensitivity of the measure was examined before and after the application of a physiotherapy therapeutic regime. The correlation coefficients (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and Spearman's) ranged from 0.87-0.98 for within-day measurements and from 0.70-0.92 for administrations between days. All indexes of the GR-SFMPQ (total score, sensory and affective scores, total count of used words, visual analogue score, present pain index) managed consistently to detect the changes in pain experienced (p<0.05), after a therapeutic intervention, when assessing for the sensitivity of the questionnaire. An explorative discriminant analysis of the GR-SFMPQ indexes managed to correctly classify up to 85% of the patients; a classification rate comparable to the full version MPQ rating capacity. It can be argued from the results of this study that the Greek version of the SFMPQ fulfils the criteria of reliability and sensitivity to fluctuations of pain and can be utilized with confidence in cross-cultural comparative research trials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".