RESPONSIVENESS OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES IN EVALUATING ROTATOR CUFF REPAIR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forty-nine patients with a repair of their rotator cuff were evaluated at baseline and at six-months after surgery using four self-reports scales (DASH, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC,) SF-36 and Washington Simple Shoulder (SST) scales. Standardized response means were used to determine responsiveness. The DASH was most responsive (SRM=1.27), the WORC (SRM=1.0) and SST (0.91) were intermediary and the least response was the SF-36 (0.73). These results suggest that the DASH may be preferable to either a disease specific scale or a shoulder scale for detecting clinical progress following cuff repair. A number of self-report scales exist for shoulder problems, including regional, joint-specific and disease specific scales. Determining the most responsive scale is essential for outcome evaluation and clinical trials. Forty-nine patients with a repair of their rotator cuff were evaluated at baseline and at six-months after surgery using four self-reports scales (DASH, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC,) SF-36 and Washington Simple Shoulder (SST) scales. An independent research assistant administered scales. Standardized response means were used to determine responsiveness. The DASH was most responsive (SRM=1.27), the WORC (SRM=1.0) and SST (0.91) were intermediary and the least response was the SF-36 (0.73). The subscale of the WORC that showed the most change was lifestyle. Physical subscales of the SF-36 showed improvement; whereas, minimal impact on mental health was observed. The DASH can be used for a variety of upper extremity conditions, whereas the WORC was designed specifically for rotator cuff disease. Unless a disease specific scale is more responsive, there is little reason to adopt a scale than can only be used for one condition. This data supports the ability of the DASH to indicate upper extremity function and the important role of the rotator cuff in function. The implications of these findings are that the DASH may be preferable to either a disease specific scale for rotator cuff disease or a shoulder scale for detecting clinical progress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".