MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200455647 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000001964

Validity, Responsiveness, and Reliability of the ACL-QOL in an Adolescent Population

2021· article· en· W3200455647 on OpenAlexaff
Meaghan Marien, Mark R. Lafave, Laurie A. Hiemstra, S. Mark Heard, Gregory M. Buchko, Sarah Kerslake

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMount Royal UniversityBanff Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReliability (semiconductor)PopulationPhysical therapyClinical psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The anterior cruciate ligament quality of life (ACL-QOL) score is a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure that assesses patients with ACL deficient and reconstructed knees. The ACL-QOL has demonstrated validity, responsiveness, and reliability in adult populations but has yet to be specifically evaluated in adolescent patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, responsiveness, and reliability of the ACL-QOL in an adolescent population. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2015, questionnaires from 294 consecutive adolescent patients consented for an ACL reconstruction were collected from an orthopaedic sport medicine clinic. The ACL-QOL was administered preoperatively, and at 6, 12, and 24 months following primary ACL reconstruction. To assess content validity, the Cronbach α and floor and ceiling effects were measured. Question reading level was measured with an online tool (https://readable.com/). Responsiveness was assessed with a 1-way analysis of variance to compare the preoperative and postoperative time periods. A test-retest strategy with completion of the ACL-QOL twice within 3 weeks was used to assess reliability using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,k) and the SEM. RESULTS: The ACL-QOL demonstrated high content validity with a Cronbach αbetween 0.93 and 0.97, with no evidence of floor or ceiling effects at any study time point. The mean readability grade level was calculated to be 6.9, along with a readability score of 68. The ACL-QOL scores revealed a statistically significant improvement over time (P<0.001) with a Cohen d of 0.56, indicating a large effect size. Test-retest reliability revealed an ICC (2,k) of 0.997 (95% confidence interval=0.992-0.999). CONCLUSIONS: The ACL-QOL demonstrated content validity, responsiveness to change, and reliability in an adolescent ACL reconstruction population. The readability of the ACL-QOL is acceptable for adolescents with an ACL injury. The ACL-QOL is a valid, responsive, and reliable patient-reported outcome measure that can be used in an adolescent population with ACL deficiency or following ACL reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207