MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125392857 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.03.013

The Development and Validation of a Self‐Administered Quality‐of‐Life Outcome Measure for Young, Active Patients With Symptomatic Hip Disease: The International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT‐33)

2012· article· en· W2125392857 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas G. Mohtadi, Damian Griffin, M. Elizabeth Pedersen, Denise Chan, Marc R. Safran, Jon K. Sekiya, Bryan T. Kelly, Jason Werle, Michael Leunig, Joseph C. McCarthy, Hal David Martin, J. W. Thomas Byrd, Marc J. Philippon, RobRoy L. Martin, Carlos A. Guanche, John C. Clohisy, Thomas Sampson, Mininder S. Kocher, Christopher M. Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersSmith and NephewCanadian Orthopaedic FoundationZimmer
KeywordsIntraclass correlationCronbach's alphaConstruct validityPhysical therapyContent validityMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Face validityPatient-reported outcomeVisual analogue scaleReliability (semiconductor)Test (biology)PromPsychometricsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a self-administered evaluative tool to measure health-related quality of life in young, active patients with hip disorders. METHODS: This outcome measure was developed for active patients (aged 18 to 60 years, Tegner activity level ≥ 4) presenting with a variety of symptomatic hip conditions. This multicenter study recruited patients from international hip arthroscopy and arthroplasty surgeon practices. The outcome was created using a process of item generation (51 patients), item reduction (150 patients), and pretesting (31 patients). The questionnaire was tested for test-retest reliability (123 patients); face, content, and construct validity (51 patients); and responsiveness over a 6-month period in post-arthroscopy patients (27 patients). RESULTS: Initially, 146 items were identified. This number was reduced to 60 through item reduction, and the items were categorized into 4 domains: (1) symptoms and functional limitations; (2) sports and recreational physical activities; (3) job-related concerns; and (4) social, emotional, and lifestyle concerns. The items were then formatted using a visual analog scale. Test-retest reliability showed Pearson correlations greater than 0.80 for 33 of the 60 questions. The intraclass correlation statistic was 0.78, and the Cronbach α was .99. Face validity and content validity were ensured during development, and construct validity was shown with a correlation of 0.81 to the Non-Arthritic Hip Score. Responsiveness was shown with a paired t test (P ≤ .01), effect size of 2.0, standardized response mean of 1.7, responsiveness ratio of 6.7, and minimal clinically important difference of 6 points. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a new quality-of-life patient-reported outcome measure, the 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). This questionnaire uses a visual analog scale response format designed for computer self-administration by young, active patients with hip pathology. Its development has followed the most rigorous methodology involving a very large number of patients. The iHOT-33 has been shown to be reliable; shows face, content, and construct validity; and is highly responsive to clinical change. In our opinion the iHOT-33 can be used as a primary outcome measure for prospective patient evaluation and randomized 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations478
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207