MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163904903 · doi:10.1177/0363546506288854

Translation and Validation of the Dutch Version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form

2006· article· en· W2163904903 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniël Haverkamp, Inger N. Sierevelt, Stefan J. M. Breugem, Kim Lohuis, Leendert Blankevoort, C. Niek van Dijk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaPhysical therapyContent validityConstruct validityDocumentationOsteoarthritisPopulationMedicineReliability (semiconductor)Convergent validityPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsInternal consistencyClinical psychologyComputer scienceAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: For knee-related surgery, there is a great demand for internationally useable subjective scoring systems. Before such measurements can be used, they should be translated and validated for the population they are used on. For the Dutch population, only the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Oxford 12 Questionnaire have been validated. However, these scores can only be used regarding osteoarthritis of the knee. In 2001, the International Knee Documentation Committee presented the Subjective Knee Form, which is a knee-specific rather than a disease-specific questionnaire. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis/symptom prevalence); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: The authors describe the translation procedure and validation of the Dutch Subjective Knee Form. After a forward-backward translation protocol, the reliability, validity, and content validity were tested. The responses of 145 consecutive knee patients on 2 questionnaires containing the Short Form-36, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Oxford 12 Questionnaire score, a visual analog scale, and the Dutch International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form were used. Reliability was tested by measuring the test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Validity was tested by correlating the questionnaire to the other outcome measurements, and content validity was tested by measuring the floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: The reliability proved excellent with an intraclass coefficient of 0.96 for test-retest. Internal consistency was strong (Cronbach alpha, .92). The construct, convergent, and divergent validities were good. The content validity was good; no floor or ceiling effect occurred. CONCLUSION: The validation procedure shows that the Dutch International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form is an excellent evaluation instrument for Dutch patients with knee-related injuries.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
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

Citations105
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207