MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160502888 · doi:10.18502/jmr.v15i2.7730

Translation, Reliability Assessment, and Validation of the Persian Version of MedRisk Instrument for Measuring Patient Satisfaction With Physical Therapy Care (20-Item MRPS)

2021· article· en· W3160502888 on OpenAlexaff
Mahboobeh Abdolalizadeh, Maryam Ghodrati, Ahmad Saeedi, Hossein Kamyab, Ali Rezaie Rayeni Nejad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Rehabilitation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaIntraclass correlationPhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleReliability (semiconductor)Construct validityMedicinePersianConvergent validityRehabilitationClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychometricsInternal consistency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Persian version of the 20-item version of the MedRisk. Materials and Methods: In our study, we used a cross-sectional and prospective validation study design. This research was a test development study involving 297 outpatients with musculoskeletal disorders from the physiotherapy centers in Kerman City, Iran, in 2017. All patients completed the MedRisk instrument for measuring patient satisfaction with physical therapy care. Participants also answered a demographic questionnaire, visual analog score, and global rating of change. Internal consistency and reproducibility were investigated, too. To determine test-retest reliability, 40 randomly selected patients completed the MedRisk instrument again 5-7 days after their treatment. Factor analysis, divergent validity, convergent validity, and the floor and ceiling effects were tested, too. The Ethics Committee of the University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran, reviewed and approved this research project. The SPSS software-24 was used for statistical analysis. Results: Dimension of MedRisk demonstrated a high internal consistency (the Cronbach alpha=0.82). Reproducibility was also satisfactory (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.76). The standard error of measurement, minimal detectable changes, and coefficients of variation indices were respectively 0.63, 1.76, and 0.13 for the total score. In factor analysis, the 4-factor solution has emerged. The external validity testing revealed that the MedRisk instrument score correlated negatively with the visual analog scale (r=-0.18, P=0.002) and global rating of change (r=-0.19, P=0.001). Eighteen individual items of MedRisk were positively correlated with global satisfaction. The results showed that items 5 and 7 had a floor effect, and all other items except items 4, 5, and 7 had a ceiling effect. Conclusion: The Persian version of the MedRisk instrument is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring patient satisfaction with physical therapy and can be used in a clinical setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Modern RehabilitationSame topicPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207