MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414168165 · doi:10.22038/abjs.2025.80920.3691

Cross-cultural Adaptation, Validation, and Reliability of the Persian version of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) for Lower Extremity.

2025· article· en· W4414168165 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khodamorad Jamshidi, Keihan Mostafavi, Khalil Kargar Shooroki, Marzieh Latifi, Seyyed Mohammad Ata Sharifi Dalooei, Mohammad Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)PersianAmputationLower limbValidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The Toronto Extremity Salvage Score for the lower extremity (LE-TESS) is a commonly used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) designed to assess physical disability in patients following lower limb salvage surgery for bone or soft tissue tumors. Although the TESS has been widely translated and culturally adapted for clinical and research purposes in many countries, it has not yet been translated into Persian (Farsi) or validated for use in Iranian society. This study aims to provide a validated and reliable Persian version of the TESS questionnaire. Methods: The LE-TESS questionnaire was adapted for the Iranian (Persian) society in accordance with international translation and cultural adaptation guidelines. The reliability and validity of the Persian LE-TESS were assessed in patients referred to Shafa Yahyaeian Hospital who underwent lower limb salvage procedures for malignant tumors between 2016 and 2022. Cronbach's alpha was used to measure internal consistency, and test-retest reliability was assessed within two weeks to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Construct validity was evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation with the Short Form-36. Results: In this study, 31 patients (54.8% male) were included, with a mean age of 26.16 ± 9.61 years. The internal consistency evaluated by Cronbach's alpha was 0.887, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) assessed by the test-retest reliability was 0.872. This research's SEM and MDC 0.95 values were as much as 11.63 and 32.23, respectively. The construct validity analysis revealed a strong correlation between the Persian LE-TESS and the SF-36. Conclusion: The Persian version of the LE-TESS demonstrated reliability and validity in assessing the physical function of patients who underwent lower limb salvage surgery for bone and soft tissue tumors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→