MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041972244 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3182407e25

Development of the Simplified Chinese Version of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire

2011· article· en· W2041972244 on OpenAlexaff
Xianzhao Wei, Xiaodong Zhu, Yushu Bai, Dajiang Wu, Jiayu Chen, Chuanfeng Wang, Kai Chen, Changwei Yang, Jingfeng Li, Ming Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)Discovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationMedicineDiscriminant validityConvergent validityConfidence intervalReliability (semiconductor)ScoliosisPhysical therapyInternal consistencyPsychometricsClinical psychologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of simplified Chinese version of the SAQ (SC-SAQ). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The SAQ is widely used to assess the perception of spinal appearance in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, there is no culturally adapted, reliable, and validated SAQ for mainland China. METHOD: The cross-cultural adaptation of the original SAQ was performed following international guidelines. The SC-SAQ was administered concurrently with the simplified Chinese version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SC-SRS-22) questionnaire to 223 patients with AIS. A total of 92 patients were randomly selected to complete the questionnaires again 4 to 7 days after the first completion. Psychometric testing included reliability by internal consistency and test-test reliability, convergent validity by comparing the SC-SAQ with the SC-SRS-22 appearance domain, and discriminant validity by analyzing the relationship between SC-SAQ scores and patients' characteristics. RESULT: Internal consistency for the SC-SAQ was satisfactory, with intradomain correlations ranging from r = 0.526 to r = 0.808 (P, 0.0001). The test-retest reliability for the SC-SAQ was excellent with intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.933 (95% confidence interval = 0.903-0.956) and good Bland-Altman agreement. (No systematic bias was found in the Bland-Altman plot.) Convergent validity test demonstrated a moderate correlation between the overall SC-SAQ and SC-SRS-22 appearance domain, with ρ = -0.401 (P, 0.0001). Correlation between the overall SC-SAQ and the major curve magnitude was significant, with r = 0.827 (P, 0.0001). Discriminant validity was confirmed by significant differences of overall SC-SAQ and individual domain scores among the 6 subgroups categorized by the major curve magnitude (P, 0.0001) and among patients requiring exercise, bracing, or surgery (P, 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The SC-SAQ showed satisfactory reliability and validity in the evaluation of spinal deformity appearance for patients with AIS in mainland China.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207