MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Polish Cultural Adaptation of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire for Evaluation of Quality of Life in Patients With Low Back Pain

2006· article· en· W2072744208 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Józef Opara, Stanislawa Szary, Eugeniusz J. Kucharz

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)Back painLow back painActivities of daily livingCronbach's alphaLumbarPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsSurgeryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Cultural adaptation and cross-sectional psychometric testing. Objectives. The aim of this study was to validate the Polish translation of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire (RMQ), which evaluates the functional level of activity of patients with discogenic low back pain with radicular radiation, caused by intervertebral herniation, according to category A1 in the Kirkaldy-Willis classification and Type QTF6 in classification Quebec Task Force. Summary of Background Data. The main concern of patients with low back pain is the functional limitation that the symptoms cause. It is important to find a validation tool by means of which their functional level can be assessed. The RMQ was compared with MOS Short Form-36 Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36), to pain scale, to depression scale, to functional scale that measures activities of daily living, and to measuring forward and side bending of the spine. Methods. Independently, two professionals made a translation and then two native speakers made a translation-back of the RMQ. Then 104 patients with lumbar disc herniation completed the RMQ, SF-36, VAS and FIR (ADL scale). The study group comprised 39 women and 65 men with an average age of 44 years. Results. The significant correlation between the RMQ and other questionnaires was found. RMQ and SF-36 Physical, r = 0.47, P < 0.00001, RMQ and Pain, r = 0.462, P < 0.00001. Cronbach’s alpha showed a value of 0.88 (scale 0–1). Conclusions. The correlation between severity of disease and quality of life, between bending of spine and quality of life, between depression and quality of life, and between activities of daily living and quality of life has been found. According to this study, the RMQ can be used as a valid tool in the assessment of the functional level of patients with lumbar pain and previous lumbar herniation. The RMQ is fast and easy to complete; it is valid, reliable, and sensitive. We recommend the questionnaire to be used in research of quality of life in low back pain. The aim of this study was to validate Polish translation of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire. A total of 104 patients with lumbar disc herniation were enrolled. The Polish version of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire is reliable and valid for the assessment of the functional status in Polish-speaking patients with low back pain. The use of this translated instrument can be recommended in future clinical 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 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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207