Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Delphi Definitions of Low Back Pain Prevalence into Swedish (Swedish DOLBaPP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Previous studies on the prevalence of low back pain have found large variations between different population-based studies. The use of different definitions could partly explain these differences. In a Delphi study 28 experts in back pain research agreed on standardized items: the "Delphi Definitions of Low Back Pain Prevalence” (DOLBaPP). The Delphi DOLBaPP needs to be adapted to different languages and cultures. The aim was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the English definitions and corresponding Delphi Definitions of Low Back Pain Prevalence (DOLBaPP) questionnaire forms into Swedish.Methods: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Delphi DOLBaPP into Swedish was conducted following recommended guidelines. After the translation process, an expert committee including medical and language experts independently provided comments on the questionnaire. The pre-final online optimal questionnaire was pretested in 181 employees from the home care, education, and food and retail sectors.Results: The DOLBaPP questionnaire forms were translated successfully into Swedish and cross-culturally adapted with few linguistic changes. Face validity of the translated version of the questionnaire was considered good by the expert committee. In question 2 about low back pain, the expression "was this pain bad enough" was re-worded into "was the pain so strong". In the pre-test 92% of the participants found the questions in the questionnaire clear, 86% that the questionnaire covered the subject adequately, and 88% needed less than five minutes to complete the questionnaire. Fifteen percent had comments including linguistic issues and issues of expanding the content. The comments were not interpreted by the review committee as improving the language nor targeting the aim. After the pre-test, consensus was reached in the review committee on the final DOLBaPP-S.Conclusions: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Delphi Definitions of Low Back Pain Prevalence into Swedish was successful, and the DOLBaPP-S can be used in epidemiological studies on the prevalence of LBP in Swedish speaking populations.
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 | 0.069 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".