MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947395239 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000001407

Validity and Reliability of the Banff Patellofemoral Instability Instrument 2.0 in an Adolescent Population

2019· article· en· W2947395239 on OpenAlexaff
Mark R. Lafave, Laurie A. Hiemstra, Shital N. Parikh, Devin Peterson, Sarah Kerslake

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsBanff CentreUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaIntraclass correlationPopulationMedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lateral patellofemoral instability is a relatively common problem in the adolescent population. Subjective and objective patient outcomes are commonly used to evaluate treatment success or failure. The Banff Patellofemoral Instability Instrument (BPII) and Paediatric International Knee Documentation Committee (Pedi-IKDC) Subjective Knee Form are patient-reported outcome measures that have been used with an adolescent population previously. The BPII 2.0 is a shortened version of the BPII and has not been validated in an adolescent population. The purpose of the current study was to validate the BPII 2.0 with an adolescent population. METHODS: This was a multicenter study where patients were recruited from 3 tertiary orthopaedic surgery clinics. A convenience sample (n=140 adolescent patients) with a confirmed diagnosis of lateral patellofemoral instability and who had failed conservative treatment was referred to one of the 3 orthopaedic surgeons. All patients completed the BPII 2.0 and Pedi-IKDC before their clinic appointment. Cronbach's alpha and floor/ceiling effects were used to determine the content validity of both instruments. Patients were also interviewed to ask questions about the BPII 2.0 comprehension and importance of items. One clinic site sent out the BPII 2.0 to 30 additional patients twice in 2 weeks to measure the test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 2,k). A Pearson r correlation coefficient was used to determine the relationship between the BPII 2.0 and the Pedi-IKDC and criterion validity. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha values were 0.95 and 0.76 for the BPII 2.0 and Pedi-IKDC, respectively. There was no evidence of floor or ceiling effects for either the BPII 2.0 or the Pedi-IKDC. The Pearson r correlation coefficient between the BPII 2.0 and IKDC baseline scores taken at the initial consultation was 0.65 (P<0.001; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.97). The intraclass correlation coefficient (2,k) for the test-retest subsample (n=30) was 0.94. Patient interviews revealed that they thought the BPII 2.0 questions were both important and comprehensible. CONCLUSIONS: The BPII 2.0 is a valid, reliable, and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure that can be used with an adolescent population with lateral patellofemoral instability. The BPII 2.0 has demonstrated criterion validity through its moderately strong correlation to the Pedi-IKDC for adolescents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207