Cross-cultural Adaptation of the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire for the French-Canadian Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ) is the only condition-specific tool assessing activity limitations and symptoms for those with pelvic girdle pain (PGP). It is simple to administer and can be used in research and clinical settings during pregnancy and postpartum periods; however, there currently is no version for the French-Canadian population. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the PGQ for the French-Canadian population. METHODS: The French-Canadian translation and adaptation of the PGQ was completed following a 4-stage approach: (1) forward translation, (2) synthesis, (3) expert committee review, and (4) testing of the prefinal version of the questionnaire. The testing stage was conducted with a cohort of 34 women, aged 18 to 45 years, who experienced PGP over the span of pregnancy or during the first year postpartum. RESULTS: The global understanding of the PGP concept was rated as either "Fair" (41.2%) or "Good" (32.4%) by the majority of participants, which led to the consensual decision to add an illustration of the pelvic girdle region to the final version of the French-Canadian PGQ. Only 1 item ("Has your leg/have your legs given way?") was reported as unclear by 12 participants (35.3%). The expert committee unanimously agreed to add a brief explanation of the term "given way" to the final version to ensure proper understanding of the question. CONCLUSIONS: The current study yielded a satisfactory French-Canadian translation of the PGQ.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".