Swiss Orthopaedics Minimal Dataset: First Pilot Report of Reliability and Validity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. The Swiss Orthopaedics Minimal Dataset (SOMD) was launched seven years ago. It is a standardized, generic, and patient-reported outcome questionnaire, comprising ten items (location of disease, pain within the past four weeks, limitations at work/leisure/sleep/autonomy, subjective value of a body part, employment status, work disability (sick leave/pension), and household support). We conducted this study about the SOMD to report its reliability, validity, and clinical applicability. Methods. A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted. The test-retest study population (n = 60; lost to follow-up: n = 7 (12%)) was drawn from three retirement homes (in 2013), while the test study population (n = 14,180; excluded (e.g., duplicates): n = 1,990 (14%)) consisted of patients from a university hospital (in 2014–2017). In the test-retest study population, the same questionnaire was completed twice (at days 0 and 7). In the test study population, only the first questionnaire was included (to avoid duplicates). In a subgroup of the test study population (n = 302), only those patients who completed the SOMD and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) of the hip within 14 days were considered (to minimize recall bias). Reliability (test-retest and internal consistency), criterion validity for the item of pain, and return rates were analyzed. Results. The test-retest study population (n = 53) showed very high test-retest reliability for all tested items of the SOMD (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96–1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.93–1.00), <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>p</a:mi> <a:mo><</a:mo> <a:mn>0.001</a:mn> </a:math> ). The test study population (n = 12,190) revealed good internal consistency reliability for all ten items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.80). The return rates of the SOMD were improvable (43% in 2016 and 31% in 2017). The subgroup of the test study population (n = 302) displayed a borderline acceptable criterion validity (correlation of the item of pain between SOMD and WOMAC hip: rho = 0.62, <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:mi>p</c:mi> <c:mo><</c:mo> <c:mn>0.001</c:mn> </c:math> ). Conclusion. This is the first report about the validation of the SOMD. A relatively high reliability (test-retest and internal consistency), borderline acceptable (criterion) validity for the item of pain, and improvable clinical implementation were observed. This analysis serves as the basis for a structured modification of the SOMD to improve its value.
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it