The Influence of Kinesiophobia and Pain Catastrophizing on Disease-Specific Quality of Life in Patients With Recurrent Patellofemoral Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Banff Patellofemoral Instability Instrument 2.0 (BPII 2.0) is a disease-specific, quality of life patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that is valid and reliable in patients with recurrent lateral patellofemoral instability (LPI). Quality of life encompasses the physical, emotional, and psychological aspects of patient functioning and recovery. Purposes: To concurrently validate the BPII 2.0 to the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and the Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Return to Sport after Injury Scale (ACL-RSI) in patients presenting with recurrent LPI and to assess baseline values for the PROMs in patients with LPI. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 107 consecutive patients with recurrent LPI were assessed between January and October 2021. Patients completed the BPII 2.0, TSK-11, PCS, and ACL-RSI. A Pearson r correlation coefficient was employed to examine relationships between the PROMs. Baseline values, as well as floor and ceiling effects and Cronbach alpha, were assessed for all PROMs. Results: All 107 patients completed the 4 PROMs. Patients included 28 men (26.2%) and 79 women (73.8%), with a mean (SD) age of 25.7 (9.8) years. The mean (SD) age at first dislocation was 14.8 (6.3) years. The TSK-11, PCS, and ACL-RSI were all statistically significantly correlated with the BPII 2.0 ( P < .01; 2-tailed), with moderate correlations ( r = -0.361-0.628) The R 2 values indicated an overlap of the constructs measured by the PROMs. Conclusion: A statistically significant correlation was evident between the BPII 2.0 and the other PROMs. The BPII 2.0 does not explicitly measure kinesiophobia or pain catastrophizing; however, the significant statistical relationship of the TSK-11 and PCS to the BPII 2.0 suggests that this information is being captured and reflected.
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 | 0.002 | 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".