Validation of the Vancouver Symptom Score Questionnaire for bladder and bowel dysfunction for Brazilian children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to translate, and perform a cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Vancouver Symptom Score (VSS) for bladder and bowel dysfunction (BBD) for Brazilian children and adolescents Materials and Methods: Six steps were performed for the translation and cross-cultural adaptation: (1) translation, (2) synthesis of translations, (3) back-translation, (4) pre-final version of the translated instrument, (5) pilot test and degree of comprehensibility and (6) elaboration of the Brazilian version of the VSS. For validation, the Brazilian Dysfunctional Voiding Score (DVSS) questionnaire was used. RESULTS: Validation was performed on a sample of 107 children and adolescents with a mean age of 9.2 ± 2.84 years, presenting BBD and 107 without BBD (control group-CG). There was a positive correlation (r = 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93, p < 0.0001) between total VSS score and total DVSS score. VSS was higher in patients with BBD (p < 0.0001). The internal consistency estimated by Cronbach's alpha was 0.87 for patients with BBD. The VSS showed excellent diagnostic accuracy in detecting cases, with an area under the ROC curve of 98% (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99, p < 0.001). A cut-off value of >11 points produced a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 96.4% to 100%) and a specificity of 91.8% (95% CI 85.1% to 95.6%). CONCLUSION: The translated, cross-culturally adapted, and validated VSS for the Brazilian population is a reliable and valid tool to identify symptoms of BBD in children and adolescents aged five to 16 years, whose first language is Brazilian Portuguese.
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".