Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of a Korean Version of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Specific Quality of Life – Revised
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective was to translate the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Specific Quality of Life - Revised instrument (ALSSQOL-R) into Korean and to examine the psychometric properties of the Korean amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) population. Methods: The translation involved forward and backward translation. The psychometric properties of the Korean version of the ALSSQOL-R (K-ALSSQOL-R) were tested by patients in an ALS multidisciplinary clinic in Korea (n = 120). The internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity were evaluated. Results: With regard to the reliability estimate, the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92) and the test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.89) were good. With regard to the validity estimate, the K-ALSSQOL-R demonstrated concurrent validity with the McGill Quality of Life Single-Item Scale (r = 0.62) and the first question of the World Health Organisation QOL Instrument-Brief (WHOQOL-BREF) (r = 0.64). The convergent validity and discriminant validity were acceptable. The confirmatory factor analysis supported a six-factor model. Conclusion: The K-ALSSOQL-R can be used as a reliable and valid measure of QOL among Korean ALS patients.
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 | 0.008 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".