Cross-Cultural Validation of the Arabic Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ): Libyan Version in Patients With Musculoskeletal Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:The Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) is a widely used tool for assessing musculoskeletal pain, both in research and clinical practice. However, a culturally appropriate Arabic version for the Libyan context has not been available. This study aims to translate the SF-MPQ, and to examine its reliability and validity for assessing musculoskeletal pain in Libya.Methods:The SF-MPQ was cross-culturally adapted into Arabic using a forward-backward method. A total of 151 patients (Mean age ± SD = 40.66 ± 14) with musculoskeletal pain completed the SF-MPQ and other measures. Of these, 148 patients completed the second round of questionnaire completion two days after the first visit. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to examine relative test-retest reliability and Bland-Altman plots was performed to examine absolute agreement between the two assessments. Spearman’s correlation was applied to assess construct validity.Results:The Arabic translation of the SF-MPQ was linguistically equivalent, without significant discrepancies. All but two of the Arabic descriptors were used by more than 33% of the participants, indicating good item measurement equivalency. The results showed a satisfactory Cronbach’s α (0.74 for the total score), which indicates good internal consistency. The ICC for the total score revealed a high correlation for the test-retest (0.91), suggesting excellent relative reliability. Bland-Altman analyses showed no significant systematic bias between the repeated measurements. There were positive statistically significant correlations among the SF-MPQ, the Visual Analog Scale, and the Fatigue Severity Scale (<i>P</i> < 0.001), demonstrating good construct validity.Conclusion:These results suggest that the Arabic SF-MPQ is reliable, valid, and cross-culturally equivalent to the original SF-MPQ for evaluating musculoskeletal pain among Arabic-speaking patients in Libya. Clinicians and researchers may therefore consider using this scale, as it is easy to use and understand by different age groups. Further research is needed to confirm our findings and to test the developed Arabic version of the SF-MPQ on different patient populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".