Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee Outcome Survey–Activities of Daily Living Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Activities of Daily Living Scale of the Knee Outcome Survey (KOS-ADLS) is a joint-specific questionnaire measuring functional limitation experienced by individuals with knee disorders. The original English version of the KOS-ADLS has been shown to be highly reliable and responsive to change. The purpose of this study was to perform a translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original version of the KOS-ADLS questionnaire into French and to validate this French version of the questionnaire. METHOD: In accordance with standard procedure, the original version of the KOS-ADLS was translated and cross-culturally adapted into French. Once the final French version of the KOS-ADLS was developed, it was subjected to further psychometric evaluation with 76 individuals with knee disorders. Each participant completed the KOS-ADLS on three occasions: at baseline, two days later to evaluate test-retest reliability, and four weeks later to evaluate responsiveness. Symptoms and function-oriented construct questions were also completed to evaluate construct-convergent and known-group validity. RESULTS: The cross-cultural adaptation procedure revealed no major problems with content or language. The French version of the KOS-ADLS showed excellent test-retest reliability with low measurement error (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92, minimal detectable change = 8.3), as well as high responsiveness (standardized response mean = 1.41; clinically important difference = 13.6). Further, it discriminates between different levels of self-rated or clinician-rated knee function. CONCLUSIONS: The French version of the KOS-ADLS is a reliable, valid and responsive questionnaire for the assessment of functional limitation in individuals with musculoskeletal knee disorders.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".