Arabic translation and cross‐cultural adaptation of the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The prevalence of dementia is expected to increase exponentially in developing countries over the next few decades.1, 2 Arabic language is widely spoken across the middle east and north Africa, where dementia diagnosis remains challenging.3 Many factors contribute to the underdiagnosis of dementia in Arabic speaking countries including the lack of validated functional assessment tools for patients with cognitive impairment.2, 4 The aim of this study is to translate, cross culturally adapt and validate the widely used Bristol Activity Of Daily Living Scale (BADLS)5 to the Arabic language. Methods First the BADLS was translated to the Arabic language by two independent bilingual experts. The Arabic version was then back translated to English by two independent translators. Then reviewed by expert panel including the original author to keep original meanings, check accuracy and standardization. A pilot study was done for Cognitive Debriefing. Expert panel discussion was done to review cognitive debriefing and finalize. Criterion validity is tested against the validated Arabic version of the Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living and the Arabic version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) test. Conclusion To our knowledge this is the first study to translate the BADLS to the Arabic language. The Arabic BADLS will enable the early and accurate diagnosis of dementia for Arabic speaking patients and caregivers. References: 1. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. The Lancet. 2020;396(10248):413‐446. 2. Epidemiology of Alzheimers Disease and Dementia in Arab Countries: A Systematic Review. Behavioural Neurology. 2019. 3. Benabdeljlil M. Assessment of cognitive disorders in the Arabic language. Journal of the neurological sciences. 2019;405(S):66‐67. 4. Abou‐Mrad F, Chelune G, Zamrini E, Tarabey L, Hayek M, Fadel P. Screening for dementia in Arabic: normative data from an elderly Lebanese sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist. 2017;31(sup1):1‐19. 5. Bucks RS, Ashworth DL, Wilcock GK, Siegfried K. Assessment of Activities of Daily Living in Dementia: Development of the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale. Age Ageing Age and Ageing. 1996;25(2):113‐120.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".