Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Quality of Life Measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose is to provide more validity, reliability, and responsiveness testing of the anterior cruciate ligament-quality of life instrument (ACL-QOL), particularly in light of consensus-based standards for the selection of health status measurement instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. DESIGN: Prospective case series. SETTING: An orthopedic surgical practice for consultation. PATIENTS: A convenience sample of 579 ACL-deficient patients. INTERVENTION: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructive surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients completed the ACL-QOL at initial visit and underwent reconstructive surgery. Patients were followed at 6, 12, and 24 months using the ACL-QOL to determine its validity and responsiveness. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine the unidimensionality of the ACL-QOL. A subset of patients took the ACL-QOL twice in a test-retest reliability analysis (intraclass correlation coefficient or ICC 2,k). Another subset of 24-month postsurgical patients measured the success of their surgery using a 7-point global rating scale of improvement as an anchor-based method of responsiveness. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha coefficients = 0.93, 0.95, 0.96, and 0.98 at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.60, SEM = 6.16, and confidence interval of 12.1 (CI 95%). Responsiveness was measured by comparing the 4 serial time periods. Patients improved significantly at each time period (P < 0.05, ETA squared 0.61). A 24-month ACL-QOL was significantly correlated (P > 0.05) to being "significantly better" or "somewhat better." CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study added more validity, reliability, and responsiveness for the ACL-QOL. The ACL-QOL has completed 8 of 9 COSMIN criteria.
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 | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".