What a Patient Sees in the Mirror: Validation of the Truncal Anterior Asymmetry Scoliosis Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction Self-image and body shape are important to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. The impact of scoliosis on anterior trunk shape has been incompletely studied. The Truncal Anterior Asymmetry Scoliosis Questionnaire (TAASQ) was developed to assess anterior truncal appearance concerns and mental preoccupation and behavioral modification related to those concerns. The purpose of this study is to validate TAASQ in AIS. Methods A total of 105 female surgical AIS patients (average age, 14.9 years; mean Cobb, 53°) completed the TAASQ, Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ), and Scoliosis Research Society Questionnaire (SRS-22) questionnaires. TAASQ was developed with breast cancer researchers and piloted in 13 perioperative adolescent and adult idiopathic scoliosis patients. TAASQ contains 14 questions, both response scale and free response. Questions are categorized into three domains: breast, appearance, and clothing. Internal consistency/reliability (Cronbach's α) and concurrent validity were determined. Results Internal consistency was 0.86, 0.77, and 0.84 for clothing, appearance, and breast domains, respectively (good to excellent). Domains and subdomains of the TAASQ correlate well with the image domain of the SRS-22 but not with the SAQ. However, given that the TAASQ was designed to assess concerns with anterior appearance, the correlation with the image domain establishes concurrent validity of the questionnaire. Conclusions TAASQ is a reliable and valid measure of the concerns and behavioral modifications related to anterior truncal appearance in female AIS patients. Further study of TAASQ will help clinicians counsel patients on the impact of surgery on anterior truncal deformity. Clinical Relevance There is a clinical lack of knowledge about the significant self-image and anterior body shape concerns of adolescent females with AIS. The TAASQ has been developed to assess concerns related to anterior truncal appearance and mental preoccupation and behavioral modification.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".