French-Canadian Adaptation and Validation of the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire for Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: An observational prospective study. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess the reliability and validity of the French-Canadian version (FCSSSQ) of the Swiss Spinal Stenosis questionnaire (SSSQ). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The SSSQ is a validated disease-specific tool developed to assess pain, function, and satisfaction with care in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS: The French-Canadian translation and adaptation of the SSSQ was completed following a four-stage approach: (1) forward translation; (2) synthesis; (3) expert committee review; and (4) testing of the questionnaire prefinal version. Psychometric properties were subsequently determined in patients who had undergone decompressive surgery for degenerative LSS. Patients completed the SSSQ adapted version, the Numerical Rating Scale, and the Oswestry Disability Index. Test-retest reliability was assessed with weighted Kappa score and intraclass correlation coefficient. Construct validity was evaluated using the Spearman correlation coefficient and responsiveness with the mean standardized response as well as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Floor and ceiling effects and internal consistency were also evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-five and 50 patients were included for the adaptation and validation processes, respectively. The test-retest reliability of the FCSSSQ total score was excellent [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.996; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.938-0.982]. High Spearman correlation coefficients were also found between the total FCSSSQ score and the leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS, 0.801), back pain NRS (0.705), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0.825) scores. External responsiveness analysis was satisfactory with an AUROC of 0.875 (95% CI 0.744-1.0). The lowest FCSSSQ possible score was observed in five patients (10%), whereas no patients reported the highest possible score. The Cronbach α coefficient ranged from 0.810 to 0.945 indicating good to excellent internal consistency. CONCLUSION: The French-Canadian version of the SSSQ is a reliable and valid questionnaire consistent with the original English version. This new version will help French-speaking clinicians and scientists document changes in condition and treatment satisfaction in patients with LSS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".