MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148806857 · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-52

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Behçet's disease quality of life questionnaire

2011· article· en· W2148806857 on OpenAlexaff
Zahi Touma, Lilian Ghandour, Abla Mehio Sibai, Houry Puzantian, Ayad Hamdan, Omar Hamdan, Jeanine Menassa, Imad Uthman, Thurayya Arayssi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Research Methodology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Activities of daily livingConstruct validityMedicineCross-sectional studyArabicReliability (semiconductor)Test (biology)Cronbach's alphaScale (ratio)Convergent validityConcurrent validityPhysical therapyGerontologyClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychometricsInternal consistency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is one Behçet's disease (BD) specific self reporting questionnaire developed and published in the literature, The Leeds BD-quality of life (QoL). We conducted a cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Arabic version of the Leeds BD-QoL METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 41 consecutive patients attending rheumatology clinics at the American University of Beirut Medical Center between June and December 2007. The BD-QoL questionnaire, the Katz Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) questionnaires were co-administered during the same visit, and severity scores were calculated. Cross-cultural adaptation of BD-QoL was performed using forward and backward translations of the original questionnaire. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the final version were determined. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was used to assess the dimensionality of the scale items. External construct validity was examined by correlating Arabic BD-QoL with the severity score, ADL and IADL. RESULTS: The 30 items of the adapted Arabic BD-QoL showed a high internal consistency (KR-20 coefficient 0.89) and test-retest reliability (Spearman's test 0.91). The convergence of all 30 items suggests that the 30-item adapted Arabic BD-QoL scale is unidimensional. BD-QoL did not correlate with any of the patients' demographics. Still, it was positively correlated with patient severity score (r 0.4, p 0.02), and IADL (but not ADL). CONCLUSIONS: This cross-cultural adaptation has produced an Arabic BD-QoL questionnaire that is now available for use in clinical settings and in research studies, among Arabic speaking patients.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.124
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.124
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.679
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.095 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Research MethodologySame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207