Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Persian version of the Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Aims Few satisfaction questionnaires have been available to physical therapists for use in an Iranian population. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Iranian version of the Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey. This was a methodological study in outpatients from the physiotherapy centres in Kerman, Iran. Methods In this study, a cross-sectional and prospective validation study design was used. The Persian version of this questionnaire was prepared using forward and backward translation. The test–retest reliability was examined through interclass correlation coefficient, and absolute reliability was assessed through minimal detectable change and standard error of measurement. Internal consistency reliability was assessed by the Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Concurrent criterion validity was evaluated by assessing the correlation between the subscales of the questionnaire and the global satisfaction index. Divergent validity was measured by comparing the Persian Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey with the visual analogue scale and with the Global Rating of Change. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 24) was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 297 individuals completed the questionnaire, and after 5–7 days, 40 participants answered the questionnaire again. The interclass correlation coefficients for the total score of Persian Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey was 0.75 and for the subscales of enhancers, detractors, location and cost were 0.76, 0.79, 0.84 and 0.40 respectively. The coefficient for internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha=0.73) was within the acceptable range. The standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were 0.5 and 1.4 respectively. The correlation of Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey subscales with global satisfaction was relatively good except for the cost subscale. Divergent validity was significant and poor for the visual analogue scale, r=–0.11 (P=0.04), but non-significant for the Global Rating of Change, r=–0.04 (P=0.40). There were no floor and ceiling effects in the Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey questionnaire subscales scores. Conclusions Although measurement properties of the Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey did not fully achieve measurement properties, the authors believe that the Persian version of the Physical Therapy Outpatient Satisfaction Survey can be used among Persian-speaking outpatient populations.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".