Correlation of Short Form 36 Health Survey with Other Relevant Clinical Scores in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Design: Observational study. Objectives: To investigate the correlation of Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) score with various relevant clinical scoring systems, in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Materials and Methods: Eighty-two patients aged more than 40 years with clinicoradiological features suggestive of degenerative LSS were enrolled. All patients completed 10 clinical scoring questionnaires, which included SF-36, Oswestry Disability Index, Swiss Spinal Stenosis (SSS) Questionnaire, Quebec Pain Disability, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (back pain), Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), Pain Disability Index (PDI), Self-paced Walking Test (SPWT), VAS (leg pain), and Neurogenic Claudication Outcome Score. A comparison of 8 health concepts of SF-36 and health change was done with other 9 clinical scores and they were statistically analyzed and correlated. Results: The mean age was 53.02 years and included 51 females (62.2%) and 31 (37.8%) males. Out of 8 health concepts, 3 of them, pain, emotional well-being, and energy/fatigue, showed a statistically significant moderate correlation with 6 clinical scores (SSS, QPD, VAS back pain, mJOA, PDI, and SPWT) ( P < 0.05, r > 0.3). The mJOA scale showed a moderate negative correlation with 4 other components also namely, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, social functioning, physical functioning as well as health change ( P < 0.05, r > 0.3). Role limitations due to physical health had a moderate negative correlation with QPD scale also ( P < 0.05, r > 0.3). Conclusions: Pain, emotional well-being, and energy/fatigue showed a moderate correlation with maximum number of scores and mJOA scale had a moderate negative correlation with 7 out of 8 components of SF-36 as well as Health change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".