Validation of Persian Version of Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Rasch Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the factor structure and test the clinometric properties of wrist and hand version of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using Rasch analysis and factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the factor structure. Higher-order factor analysis was used to explore the hierarchical structure of the items. The Rasch model was used to assess the overall fit, reliability, validity, and construct unidimensionality. Rasch analysis and factor analysis were conducted using RUMM2030 and LISREL software, respectively. SETTING: Outpatient hand rehabilitation clinic. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of patients (N=206) with various hand injuries who completed the Persian version of the Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation (PRWHE-P) at 2 months postinjury. The study included 66 men and 139 women, with a mean age of 40 years. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The PRWHE-P was used as a patient-reported measure of pain and disability in wrist and hand conditions. RESULTS: Factor analysis confirmed 3-factor models of the PRWHE-P. Items fit well to the Rasch model in 3 subscales. The PRWHE-P had a good item reliability (0.82) and good internal consistency (0.8). No differential item functioning was detected for age, sex, dominant hand, or injured hand. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicated that the PRWHE-P with 3 sub scales is a reliable and valid measurement tool and could be used in patients with different wrist and hand disabilities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".