Tradução, adaptação cultural e validação da versão brasileira do questionário Nonarthritic Hip Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) is a clinical evaluation questionnaire that was developed in the English language to evaluate hip function in young and physically active patients. The aims of this study were to translate this questionnaire into the Brazilian Portuguese language, to adapt it to Brazilian culture and to validate it. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cohort study conducted between 2008 and 2010, at Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ). METHODS: Questions about physical activities and household chores were modified to better fit Brazilian culture. Reproducibility, internal consistency and validity (correlations with the Algofunctional Lequesne Index and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index [WOMAC]) were tested. The NAHS-Brazil, Lequesne and WOMAC questionnaires were applied to 64 young and physically active patients (mean age, 40.9 years; 31 women). RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (which measures reproducibility) was 0.837 (P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots revealed a mean error in the difference between the two measurements of 0.42. The internal consistency was confirmed through a Cronbach alpha of 0.944. The validity between NAHS-Brazil and Lequesne and between NAHS-Brazil and WOMAC showed high correlations, r = 0.7340 and r = 0.9073, respectively. NAHS-Brazil showed good validity with no floor or ceiling effects. CONCLUSION: The NAHS was translated into the Brazilian Portuguese language and was cross-culturally adapted to Brazilian culture. It was shown to be a useful tool in clinical practice for assessing the quality of life of young and physically active patients with hip pain.
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 | 0.078 | 0.129 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".