MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413855829 · doi:10.1002/jeo2.70402

Validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the patient's joint perception question in patients undergoing knee arthroplasty

2025· article· en· W4413855829 on OpenAlex
Khalid A Alsheikh, Firas M Alsebayel, Abdulrahman Alzahrani, Bader Alqahtani, Jude N. Abanmi, Abdulaziz Fahad Altammami

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Orthopaedics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArthroplastyReliability (semiconductor)Orthopedic surgeryArabicPhysical therapyPerceptionJoint arthroplastyPsychologyMedicineTotal knee arthroplastySurgeryPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to alleviate pain and restore function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. While the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) are established measures of patient satisfaction and functional outcomes after TKA, they may not directly capture the patient's subjective perception of the joint itself. The FJS was used to assess concurrent validity, as it reflects the degree to which patients are unaware of their artificial joint, which is related to joint perception. The patient's joint perception (PJP) question offers a simplified alternative to evaluate joint awareness. Methods This prospective observational study included patients who underwent TKA between 2018 and 2023. An Arabic version of the PJP (Ar‐PJP) question was translated using a forward‐backwards translation process. Participants completed the PJP, FJS, and reduced WOMAC at two time points, three weeks apart. Statistical analyses assessed validity and reliability using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Results A total of 100 participants were included in the study. The mean PJP score was 28.9 (standard deviation [SD]: 13.7), and the mean WOMAC score was 46.1 (SD: 17.8). A moderate negative correlation was found between the Ar‐PJP score and FJS ( r = −0.683; p < 0.001), A moderate negative correlation was found between the Ar‐PJP score and FJS ( r = −0.683; p < 0.001), while the correlation with WOMAC was weak and non‐significant ( r = −0.088; p = 0.382), supporting discriminant validity. Conclusions The Ar‐PJP is a valid and reliable tool for assessing patients' perceptions post‐TKA. As a single‐question measure, it simplifies evaluations and enhances patient care in Arabic‐speaking populations. Level of Evidence Level II.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.247 · 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