Quality of Life after Stroke: Evaluation of the Greek SAQOL-39g
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Stroke and aphasia rehabilitation aims to improve people's quality of life. Yet, scales for measuring health-related quality of life in stroke typically exclude people with aphasia. They are also primarily available in English. An exception is the 39-item generic version of the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale (SAQOL-39g). This scale has been tested with people with aphasia; it has been adapted for use in many countries including Greece. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Greek SAQOL-39g. METHODS: An interview-based psychometric study was carried out. Participants completed: receptive subtests of the Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test, the Greek SAQOL-39g, the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, the Frenchay Activities Index, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the Barthel Index. RESULTS: 86 people took part; 26 provided test-retest reliability data. The Greek SAQOL-39g demonstrated excellent acceptability (minimal missing data; no floor/ceiling effects), test-retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96 (overall scale), 0.83-0.99 (domains)] and internal consistency [Cronbach's alpha = 0.96 (overall scale), 0.92-0.96 (domains)]. There was strong evidence for convergent [r = 0.53-0.80 (overall scale), 0.54-0.89 (domains)] and discriminant validity [r = 0.52 (overall scale), 0.04-0.48 (domains)]. CONCLUSION: The Greek SAQOL-39g is a valid and reliable scale. It is a promising measure for use in stroke and aphasia treatment prioritization, outcome measurement and service evaluation.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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 it