The Aging Males' Symptoms rating scale: cultural and linguistic validation into English
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
Unlike in women, where instruments are available to measure the severity of symptoms, cross-culturally validated instruments are lacking for aging males. This study set out to conduct a translation and cultural validation of the 'Aging Males' Symptoms' (AMS) scale, originally developed in German, into English for use in North America and the UK. Following international methodological recommendations, the AMS scale was translated in a standardized way consisting of forward translation, quality control, backward translation and a pretest. Five experienced bilingual translators and reviewers were involved. Many difficulties of compatibility between the cultural backgrounds of Germany, the UK and North America were identified and resolved by consensus. This resulted in one version for British and American English. A pretest in volunteers demonstrated clarity and understandability across social classes, but also suggested minor changes in the instrument. A preliminary test-retest comparison of the final scale showed high reliability with a correlation coefficient of 0.93 for the total AMS score. The AMS scale is a valuable tool for assessing symptoms in the aging male. This scale can be used in German and English speaking countries. Flemish and Finnish versions are also in 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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