Validation of the Reflux Symptom Index in French-Speaking Quebec Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance There is a need to culturally adapt this commonly used patient-reported outcome measure, the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), for use in Canada and Quebec’s French population. Objective To translate and validate the RSI for use in Quebec French speakers, ensuring reliability and validity within this population. Design Prospective case-control study. Setting Voice and Dysphagia Laboratory at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants Patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and healthy controls were recruited during outpatient clinical laryngology visits. Participants were eligible if they were at least 18 years old and spoke French as their native language. Intervention or Exposures A Quebec-French version of the RSI (Q-Fr-RSI) was validated using the “translation-back-translation” method. Participants completed the Q-Fr-RSI, Fr-VHI, and their laryngoscopy was examined and assigned a Reflux Finding Score at their initial visit. Participants repeated the Q-Fr-RSI via telephone follow-up. Main Outcome Measures Feasibility, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the Q-Fr-RSI were assessed. Results Eighty-nine participants were recruited: 49 patients within the experimental group and 40 subjects within the control group. The feasibility was evaluated as percentage of missing answers in the full sample at the first time point, 0%, and second time point, 1.2%. Internal consistency via Cronbach’s alpha was high (.90). Intra-rater reliability via intraclass correlation demonstrated good level of agreement (.84). Internal validity demonstrated a strongly significant difference between the groups’ answers (mean score of 23.9 vs 6.65, respectively, P < .001). Conclusions This data suggest that the Q-Fr-RSI can be used to assess LPR in the French-speaking Canadian population. Relevance In the bilingual country of Canada, and especially in the province of Quebec where over 90% of people speak French, an appropriate validation of the Q-Fr-RSI allows all patients to be monitored adequately. A Quebec-French patient-reported outcome measure can accurately represent these patients in future research studies utilizing these metrics.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".