Concurrent Validation of the Banff Patella Instability Instrument to the Norwich Patellar Instability Score and the Kujala Score in Patients With Patellofemoral Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Banff Patella Instability Instrument (BPII) is a disease-specific, patient-reported, quality-of-life outcome measure designed to assess patients with patellofemoral instability. The iterative assessment of the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a health-related patient-reported outcome measure is vital to the development of a high-quality evaluation tool. PURPOSE: To assess the concurrent validity of the BPII to the Norwich Patellar Instability (NPI) score and the Kujala score. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 74 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of recurrent patellofemoral instability completed the BPII, NPI, and Kujala scores at the initial orthopaedic consultation. A Pearson r correlation coefficient was computed to determine the relationship between each of these patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: There were statistically significant correlations between the BPII and the NPI score (r = -0.53; P < .001) as well as the BPII and the Kujala score (r = 0.50; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a moderately strong correlation of the BPII to other outcome measures used to evaluate patients with patellofemoral instability. This study adds further validity to the BPII in accordance with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) guidelines.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".