Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turkish version of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score in patients with musculoskeletal tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to translate theToronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) into Turkish and perform acrosscultural adaptation for patients with musculoskeletal tumors. METHODS: Thirty-six patients (20 male, 16 female; mean age = 36.6 ± 15.4 years) who were diagnosed with malignant bone and soft tissue sarcoma or benign aggressive bone tumors between the years 2007 and 2012 were included in the study. TESS was translated into Turkish and back translated to determine language validity. To test convergent validity, the Turkish versions of the Short Form-36 (SF-36), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) were used. SF-36 was used on all patients while WOMAC and DASH were used onpatients with lower extremity tumors and upper extremity tumors respectively. The tests were repeated 15 days later and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The Turkish version of TESS was found to have a strong negative correlation with WOMAC (r = -0.702; P < 0.001) and DASH (r = -0.774; P < 0.001) as well as a strong negative correlation with ROMS (r = 0.601; P < 0.001). Turkish TESS also had a statistically significant correlation with SF-36-Physical functioning, SF-36-Role Physical, SF-36-Bodily Pain, and SF36-General Health at levels ranging from 0.326 to 0.669 (r values ranging from 0.326 to 0.669, P < 0.001). The internal consistency (Cronbach's α:0.96 for lower extremity and Cronbach's α:0.94 for upper extremity) and test-retest reliability of Turkish TESS were found to be excellent (ICC lower extremity: 0.96 [0.935-0.983]; P < 0.001 and ICC upper extremity: 0.99 [0.967-0.997]; P < 001). ICC values varied between 0.674 and 0.987 for each item of the scale for both extremities. Conlusion: The Turkish version of TESS seems to be a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate physical function after musculoskeletal tumor surgery in Turkish patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, Diagnostic Study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".