MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488355401 · doi:10.12968/ijtr.2016.23.8.380

Cross-cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Hausa version of the Neck Disability Index questionnaire

2016· article· en· W2488355401 on OpenAlexaff
Bashir Kaka, Omoyemi O. Ogwumike, Howard Vernon, Ade Fatai Adeniyi, Samuel O. Ogunlade

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHausaReliability (semiconductor)MedicineConstruct validityPsychometricsPsychologyClinical psychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt initiated psychometric tests of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire into Hausa language. The prevalence of neck conditions among Hausa patients in Northern Nigeria necessitates the use of the NDI questionnaire. The fact that there was no Hausa version of this instrument has limited its use, hence there is a need for its translation into the Hausa language. Methods: The English version of the NDI questionnaire was translated into Hausa language through a forward and backward translation process. Sixty-two patients were selected for validation of the questionnaire using a purposive sampling technique. The original English version (NDI) and the Hausa version (NDI-H) were administered to the patients and re-administered within the space of one week to ensure validation. Psychometric testing was done to ascertain reliability and construct validity. Findings: The Hausa version of the NDI showed good internal consistency (α= 0.741) and test-retest reliability of r=0.84, p< 0.05. The responsiveness analysis revealed a significant relationship (r = 0.47, p=0.01). Factor analysis revealed a 2-factor 10 items structure which explained the variance of 49.7%. Conclusions: The NDI was successfully translated into Hausa language and validated with good psychometric properties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Therapy and RehabilitationSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207