Validation of a Russian version of the Berg Balance Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective : linguistic and cultural adaptation of the original version of Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and assessment its psychometric properties. Patients and methods . The staff of the Validation Center of International Scales and Questionnaires of the Research Center of Neurology received consent from Katherine Berg to validate the BSS in Russia. We carried out the linguocultural ratification during the validation study and prepared a Russian version of the scale. To assess the psychometric properties of the scale (reliability, validity, and sensitivity), we evaluated 55 patients (30 females and 25 males) aged 22–88 years with different neurological disorders (vascular and demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system, peripheral neuropathy, and movement disorders). We analyzed the differences of the total BBS score and the number of patients with high and low risk of falls at the end of rehabilitation compared to baseline to assess the dynamics of changes. Results and discussion . We successfully performed the translation and linguocultural adaptation of the BBS. The scale represents a high level of validity (expert score: 8.6 out of 10 points), reliability (Pearson's correlation coefficient r=0.98, р<0.0001; Cronbach's alpha α=0.94 р<0.001; Cohen's kappa κ=0.71, p<0.0001) and sensitivity (р<0.0001). After a two-week rehabilitation course, the risk of falls significantly decreased (χ2 =4.42; р=0.035); however, the level of independence of movement did not change significantly (F=0.94; р=0.636). Conclusion . The Russian version of the BBS was officially adapted based on the results of the accomplished validation study and is recommended for use both in routine clinical practice and in clinical trials by neurologists and rehabilitologists. The scale is available for downloading by QR code and on the website of Validation Center of International Scales and Questionnaires of the Research Center of Neurology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".