MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6930097359 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.11730896

Womac score pdf deutsch

2024· other· en· W6930097359 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACOsteoarthritisCronbach's alphaClinical trialRating scaleElectronic data capture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Womac score pdf deutschRating: 4.6 / 5 (9072 votes)Downloads: 57215>>>CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD<<< Standing upright 6. mcmaster osteoarthritis index ( womac) please circle the appropriate rating for each item. the number of different score ranges was high and only 39% of trials used the standard 0- 96, oror 0- 240 ranges. in 74% of trials the reporting of the scale used was inadequate. all womac scales ( pain, stiffness, function) were internally consistent with cronbach s coefficient alpha ranging from 0. der deutsch knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score ( koos) ist eine erweiterung des womac. western ontario and mcmaster universities ( womac) osteoarthritis index as an assessment tool to indicate total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary knee. the score map womac score pdf deutsch is an easy- to- use graphical display of the entire range of womac pain scores from no pain to extreme pain for each item comprising the womac pain scale. responsiveness was evaluated by comparing pre- pdf and postoperative scores in all questionnaires in all patients using standardized response means. die fünf subskalen lassen sich einzeln bewerten → der koos sammelt daten anhand von fünf patientenzentrierten subskalen mit insgesamt 42 fragen ( " auszug aus dem koos" ) [ 3] : 1. the user guide contains information on index derivation, specific clinimetric issues, formatting, index presentation, score calculation, statistical issues and provides over 900 relevant references, the majority to previous studies employing the womac ® osteoarthritis index. rate your pain when. the womac pain score range is variously reported and includes vas 0– 10 scale ( commonly reported as a 0– 50 range), vas 0– 100 scale ( commonly reported as a 0– 500 range), an 11- box numerical rating scale ( nrs) ( commonly reported as 0– 50 range) or a likert scale ( commonly reported as a 0– 20 range). 1 user guide xii. dieser gelenkspezifische fragebogen ist für jedermann kostenlos unter. ergebnisse ambulanter orthopädischer rehabilitation ergebnismessung mittels funktionsfragebogen- hannover- rücken, dash- und womac- score. patient name dob. in a small number of cases the score range specified was not interpretable. how severe is your stiffness after first awakening in the morning? the scores are summed for items in each subscale, with possible ranges as follows: pain= 0- 20, stiffness= 0- 8, physical function= 0- 68. the user guide contains information on index derivation, specific clinimetric issues, formatting, index pdf presentation, score calculation, statistical issues and provides deutsch over 900 relevant references, the majority to previous studies employing the womac® osteoarthritis index. level of pain in left knee 8. results: data from 780 patients were used in the analyses. target population : patients with hip and/ or knee osteoarthritis. womac is one of the commonly used functional score in indonesia which consists of 3 subscales, i. alternative scale and scoring exist. construct validity was tested by comparing domain scores of the gnkss with domain scores of the german womac and the sf- 36. the aim of this study is to translate and vali- date the indonesian womac for indonesian. at night while in bed 4. the reduced womac function scale provides an alternative which will limit the number of missing values, and hence the number of invalid womac scores. foreword overview conceptual deutsch basis derivation of the item inventory validation studies ( reliability, validity, responsiveness) orthopaedic validation study pharmacologic validation study specific clinimetric issues likert vs visual analogue scaling prior score availability. going up or down stairs 3. it is proposed that where 1 or 2 items are missing, the average value for the sub- scale is substituted in lieu of these missing values. sitting or lying down 5. pain, stifness, and physical functions. © georg thieme verlag kg stuttgart · new york. total difficulty score ( max 68) : total womac score ( max 96) : scoring each scale uses the following descriptors for all items: none, mild moderate, severe, and extreme. the western ontario and mcmaster universities osteoarthritis ( womac) pain scale quantifies knee pain severity with activities of daily living, but the potential impact of pain in other body regions on womac pain scores has not been explored using a causal modeling approach. articlepdf available. the following is the table of contents from the womac ® 3. der gesamtscore für die drei sub- skalen reicht bei den fragen zum schmerz von 0– 50 punkten, bei den fragen zur steifigkeit von 0– 20 und bei den fragen zur all- tagsaktivität von 0– 170 punkten. western ontario and. level of pain in right knee 7. the western ontario and mcmaster universities osteoarthritis index ( womac) name: _ _ _ _ _ date: _ _ _ _ _ instructions: please rate the activities in each category according to the following. the scores for each subscale are summed up, with a possible score range of 0- 20 for pain, 0- 8 for stiffness, and 0- 68 for physical function. usually a sum of the scores for all three subscales gives a total womac score, however there are other methods that have been used to combine scores. womactm questionnaire objectives : the womactm index is a disease- specific, tri- dimensional self- administered questionnaire, for assessing health status and health outcomes in osteoarthritis womac score pdf deutsch of the knee and/ or hip. how severe is your stiffness after sitting, lying, or. womac osteoarthritis index 1. these correspond to an ordinal scale of 0- 4. table 2: summary of basic reporting of womac pain sub- scale and womac index. none slight moderate severe extreme. rehabilitation services pt tha/ tka womac questionnaire mr/ 15) page 1 of 1. convergent construct validity was assessed by comparing the results of the icoap subscales and the overall score to the pain scales of the western ontario and mcmasters university osteoarthrosis score ( womac) and the knee- injury and osteoarthrosis outcome score ( koos). indonesia has no oa functional score validated yet into indonesian. walking on a flat surface 2. womac ® user guide. we adapted the womac for the german language and tested its metric properties, test- retest reliability and validity in 51 patients with knee and hip oa.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3450.181

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.231 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studies→French-language works237,207→