Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Measurement Properties of the Italian Version of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire is a tool designed for self-assessment of forearm pain and disability in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). However, an Italian version of this questionnaire has not been available. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were: (1) to translate and cross-culturally adapt the PRTEE questionnaire into Italian and (2) to evaluate its measurement properties. DESIGN: This was a longitudinal, observational measurement study. METHODS: The PRTEE questionnaire was cross-culturally adapted to Italian according to established guidelines. Ninety-five individuals (41 women, 54 men) with unilateral, imaging-confirmed, chronic LET were selected consecutively to assess the measurement properties of the PRTEE questionnaire. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were estimated. RESULTS: The Italian version of the PRTEE displayed a high degree of internal consistency, with a Cronbach alpha of .95. The test-retest reliability was high for both short-term and medium-term, with intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) of .95 and .93, respectively. The PRTEE exhibited a strong correlation (r=.77-.91, P<.0001) with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) at the baseline and a moderate correlation (r=.58-.74, P<.0001) at discharge. The responsiveness was higher for the PRTEE than for the DASH. Limitations A methodological limitation of the study is that due to the small sample size, a factor analysis was not performed to assess convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The Italian version of the PRTEE questionnaire is internally consistent, demonstrates expected correlations with other measures, and is more responsive than the DASH in Italian patients with chronic LET.
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".