French translation and cross‐cultural adaptation of The Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Validation studies of disease-specific instruments for myotonic dystrophy type-1 (DM1) are required prior to their global use in clinical trials involving different cultures and countries. Here we translate and culturally adapt the Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index (MDHI), a disease-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure, for a French DM1 population. METHODS: Using the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Task Force method for translation and adaptation of PRO questionnaires, we created a French translation of the MDHI. We subsequently tested this instrument in a cohort of French-speaking patients with DM1. RESULTS: The MDHI was forward and back translated and modified by consensus to create the most compatible translation. Cognitive interviews were conducted with 5 patients with DM1 to ensure the usability and understanding of the translation. DISCUSSION: The French version of the MDHI is an optimal translation of the original instrument that is acceptable to native patients and ready for clinical trial use. Muscle Nerve 57: 686-689, 2018.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".