A systematic review and meta-analysis of Patient-Rated Wrist (and Hand) Evaluation (PRWE/PRWHE) measurement properties, translation, and/ or cross-cultural adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To critically appraise, summarize, and synthesize the evidence on the psychometric, translation and/or cross-cultural adaptation properties of the Patient-Rated Wrist (and Hand) Evaluation (PRWE/PRWHE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched from 1998 to February 2021. Studies addressing psychometric, translation and/or cross-cultural adaptation properties were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed methodological quality of the studies using the COSMIN checklist. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted to pool the estimates of each measurement property. Otherwise, qualitative synthesis was conducted. The overall quality of evidence on each measurement property was provided using GRADE principles. RESULTS: Forty-four studies were eligible for data extraction. The PRWE/PRWHE has been translated into 21 languages. The best factor structure was a one-dimensional construct with three unidimensional subscales. High-quality evidence supports very good structural and cross-cultural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, and hypothesis testing for construct validity against DASH in wrist and hand injuries. However, low-quality evidence supports acceptable responsiveness property. The minimal clinically important difference for the PRWE/PRWHE was 24 points for patient-level comparisons and 17 for groups. CONCLUSION: CRD42020180250IMPLICATION FOR REHABILITATIONSThe PRWE/PRWHE is a reliable and valid anatomical region-specific measure to assess pain and disability in patients with wrist and hand injuries.Each individual subscale of the PRWE/PRHWE (pain, specific activities, and usual activities) can be used separately as a measure of pain and disability.Change scores less than 9/100 in the total score, should be considered as measurement error, not real change. Changes in the total score between 17 and 24/100 could be assumed as the minimal clinically important change in the condition of patients over time. The PRWE/PRWHE is available in 21 different languages and has been successfully adapted into highly diverse cultures. This point could be considered as one of the merits of using PRWE/PRWHE in clinical settings in multi-lingual and multi-cultural countries, when clinicians need a psychometrically sound patient reported wrist/hand measure..
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 | 0.030 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".