MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399830485 · doi:10.1097/pxr.0000000000000367

Cultural adaptation and validation in Italian of the Seated Postural Control Measure for Adults 2.0

2024· article· en· W4399830485 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Berardi, Rachele Simeon, Maria Rosaria Ricciardi, Marco Tofani, Barbara Lucia, Federica Aghilarre, Brigitte Gagnon, Silvia Giuliani, Giovanni Galeoto

Bibliographic record

VenueProsthetics and Orthotics International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services Sociaux
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)Adaptation (eye)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyMedicineComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cultural adaptation and validation in Italian of the Seated Postural Control Measure for Adults 2.0 (SPCMA 2.0). METHODS: The original scale was translated and culturally adapted from French to Italian using the "Translation and Cultural Adaptation of Patient Reported Outcomes Measures-Principles of Good Practice" guidelines. Its internal consistency and test-retest reliability were examined. Its concurrent validity was evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients with the Italian version of the Wheelchair use Confidence Scale and Wheelchair Skills Test 4.2. RESULTS: Fifty-nine people were evaluated and re-evaluated after 48 h. Most of the items and subscale totals were stable in the 2 evaluations as they reported an intraclass correlation coefficient value of >0.77. The test-retest analysis of the dynamic evaluation was performed on the same patients 48 h apart. The analysis for construct validity showed statistically significant correlations with Wheelchair use Confidence Scale and Wheelchair Skills Test 4.2. CONCLUSIONS: Seated Postural Control Measure for Adults 2.0 is one of the few tools that allow researchers to perform a quantitative and standardized posture assessment in a cost-effective and time-saving way. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that it is an easy-to-administer scale and requires readily available tools. The limitations of this study highlighted above and the need to use quantitative and qualitative tools in clinical practice imply the need to conduct future studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProsthetics and Orthotics InternationalSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207