Translation, Reliability and Validity of the Spanish Version of the Modified New Mobility Score (NMS-ES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The New Mobility Score (NMS) is an easy to administer self-report measure of functional ability, and is used worldwide as a hip fracture (HF) score, but a Spanish version does not exist. The aim of the study is to translate NMS into Spanish, and to measure its inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent validity in a sample of Spanish speaking patients with HF. A reliability and validity study with a sample of 60 adults, 65 years or older (46 women and 14 men; mean age 81.7 years) with a hip fracture admitted consecutively to the acute trauma service of the Health Campus Hospital of Granada. The participants were interviewed during the first week after surgery by an occupational therapist or a physiotherapist. The statistical test used for analysis were: Cronbach's α coefficient, McNemar-Bowker test, Bland-Altman plot, Spearman´s Rho, and Mann-Whitney U test. The Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.90. No inter-rater systematic differences were found. We noted significant associations between the Spanish Version of the Modified New Mobility Score (NMS-ES) and selected health outcomes: Age, cognition, pre-fracture function, and basic mobility. The NMS-ES is a reliable and valid instrument to assess pre-injury functional levels for patients with HF in Spanish speaking countries.
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 | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".