MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of the Lysholm Knee Scale for Various Chondral Disorders of the Knee

2004· article· en· W2125296178 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyIntraclass correlationOsteoarthritisConstruct validityCronbach's alphaKnee painPopulationPain scaleCriterion validityReliability (semiconductor)Physical medicine and rehabilitationSquatting positionPsychometricsSurgeryPatient satisfactionClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Lysholm knee scale is a condition-specific outcome measure that was originally designed to assess ligament injuries of the knee. The purpose of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the Lysholm knee scale for various chondral disorders of the knee. METHODS: Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, content validity, criterion validity, construct validity, and responsiveness to change were determined for the Lysholm knee scale within subsets of an overall study population of 1657 patients with chondral disorders of the knee. The study population was a heterogeneous group of patients with various types of traumatic and degenerative chondral lesions, including isolated lesions and those associated with meniscal and ligament injuries. RESULTS: The overall Lysholm knee scale and six of the eight domains had acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.91) and internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.65). The overall Lysholm knee scale demonstrated acceptable floor (0%) and ceiling (0.7%) effects; however, the floor effects for the domain of squatting and the ceiling effects for the domains of limp, instability, support, and locking were unacceptable (>30%). There was acceptable criterion validity with significant (p < 0.05) correlations between the overall Lysholm knee scale and the physical functioning, role-physical, and bodily pain domains of the Short Form-12 scale; the pain, stiffness, and function domains of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; and the Tegner activity scale. The overall Lysholm knee scale had acceptable construct validity, with all nine hypotheses demonstrating significance (p < 0.05), and it had acceptable responsiveness to change (effect size, 1.16; standardized response mean, 1.10), with large effects (> or = 0.80) for the domains of pain, limping, swelling, and squatting and a small effect (> or = 0.20) for the domain of instability. CONCLUSIONS: The Lysholm knee scale demonstrated overall acceptable psychometric performance for outcomes assessment of various chondral disorders of the knee, although some domains demonstrated suboptimal performance. Psychometric testing of other condition-specific knee instruments in patients with chondral disorders of the knee would be helpful to allow for comparison of psychometric properties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.236 · 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