Validation Study of a Finnish Version of the Western Ontario and McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to validate a Finnish version of the internationally used Western Ontario and McMasters University osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) questionnaire, by testing its reliability validity and responsiveness. The subjects of the study were patients scheduled for elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA). The patients completed the WOMAC questionnaire twice prior to surgery and once postoperatively to enable reliability construct validity and responsiveness analysis. Test-retest reliability could be calculated for 67 patients (37 TKA and 30 THA). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCa) exceeded 0.9 with the exception of the stiffness subscale which averaged 0.8. Correlation of the preoperative WOMAC total score with the Harris Hip Score (HHS) in 30 patients and American Knee Society Score (AKSS) in 37 patients were mediocre ranging from 0.48 to 0.53. To test responsiveness, the first preoperative and the postoperative WOMAC scores of 74 subjects were compared (41 TKA and 33 THA). Standard response means (SRM) and effect sizes (ES) exceeded the recommended score of 0.8, ranging from 1.15 to 2.35. In conclusion the Finnish translation of the WOMAC questionnaire performs as the original, is valid and can be used in future studies of osteoarthritis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".