Evaluation of joint awareness after acetabular fracture: Validation of the Forgotten Joint Score according to the COSMIN checklist protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A fracture of the acetabulum is an uncommon, but serious injury. Established outcome tools do not reflect the patient's perspective after fracture of the hip joint. Originally designed for post-arthroplasty patients, the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) tool evaluating the disease-specific health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). AIM: To validate the FJS in patients after acetabular fracture. METHODS: In a prospective mono-centric cohort study, we evaluated 100 patients at mean 5.2 ± 3.6 years after a fracture of the acetabulum. The validation study followed the complete COSMIN checklist protocol. For calculation of convergent validity, we used the Tegner-Activity Scale, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the EuroQol-5D, and a subjective rating of change as an anchor variable. RESULTS: We confirmed good internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.95. With an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.99 (95%CI: 0.97, 0.99), test-retest reliability of the FJS was excellent. Correlation coefficients between the questionnaires were moderate to high ranging from |0.56| to |0.83| (absolute value). No relevant floor or ceiling effects occurred. Standard error of measurement was 3.2 and smallest detectable change (SDC) was 8.8. Thus, changes greater than 8.8 points between two assessments denote a real change in FJS. CONCLUSION: The FJS is a valid and reliable tool for evaluation of patient-reported outcome in posttraumatic condition after acetabular fracture. The SDC indicating a real clinical improvement was 8.8 points in the FJS. We could confirm responsiveness of the FJS and found no relevant floor- or ceiling effects.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".