Comparison of the Original and Reduced Versions of the Berg Balance Scale and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index in Patients Following Hip or Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the original and reduced versions of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), as completed by patients following total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA), with respect to their potential utility in clinical and research settings. METHOD: Patients with THA (n=26) or TKA (n=28) were evaluated before and after 5 to 7 weeks' participation in a home-based exercise programme. They were assessed using the original versions of the BBS and the WOMAC; scores for the reduced versions of the BBS and the WOMAC were extracted from the original versions. RESULTS: Good to excellent correlations (r≥0.80) were observed between the original and the reduced versions of the BBS and the WOMAC. The index of responsiveness, evaluated using standardized response means (SRM), was similar for the original and the reduced versions of the BBS and the WOMAC function sub-scale. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced versions of the BBS and the WOMAC provided similar information to the original versions and were equally responsive. These reduced versions comprise fewer questions and may be completed in considerably less time, which suggests that they may be advantageous for clinical and research use.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".