Prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop a questionnaire that specifically evaluates the ability of trans-tibial amputees to don and doff a prosthesis and to investigate the psychometric properties of the newly developed questionnaire. BACKGROUND: Prosthesis should be donned and doffed few times during the day and night; thus, it is important to measure ease of donning and doffing. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. METHODS: The questionnaire was designed and evaluated by a group of experts. The final questionnaire was administered to 50 individuals with trans-tibial amputation. A test-retest study was also conducted on 20 amputees to assess the repeatability of questionnaire items. RESULTS: The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire was developed and tested through a pilot study. Based on Kappa index, the questionnaire items showed correlation coefficients greater than 0.7, which indicate good reliability and repeatability. The majority of the participants had good hand dexterity (80%) and could perform all types of grasps. The mean satisfaction scores with donning and doffing were 69.9 and 81.4, respectively. Most of the respondents needed to don and doff the prosthesis 3.44 times per day. Based on a 7-point score, the total scores ranged between 3 and 7. CONCLUSION: The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire items showed good psychometric properties. A scoring method was suggested based on the pilot sample, which requires further evaluation to be able to differentiate between more suspension types. A larger international multicenter evaluation is required in the future to measure the responsiveness of the scales. This questionnaire will be useful in the evaluation of the ability of amputees to don and doff a trans-tibial limb prosthesis. Clinical relevance Donning and doffing of prostheses are challenging tasks for many lower limb amputees. The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire, on its own or combined with other prosthetic evaluation questionnaires, has the potential to help manufacturers, clinicians, and researchers gain knowledge and improve the donning and doffing qualities of prostheses.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".