Translation and Validation of the Knee Society Score - KSS for Brazilian Portuguese.

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

To translate, culturally adapt and validate the "Knee Society Score"(KSS) for the Portuguese language and determine its measurement properties, reproducibility and validity.

Related collections

Most cited references 56

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading.

J Bland, D Altman (1995)

When comparing a new method of measurement with a standard method, one of the things we want to know is whether the difference between the measurements by the two methods is related to the magnitude of the measurement. A plot of the difference against the standard measurement is sometimes suggested, but this will always appear to show a relation between difference and magnitude when there is none. A plot of the difference against the average of the standard and new measurements is unlikely to mislead in this way. We show this theoretically and by a practical example.

0 comments Cited 224 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome.

Anne Fossel, Michele D Levine, M Koris … (1993)

We developed a self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in patients who have carpal tunnel syndrome. The reproducibility, internal consistency, validity, and responsiveness to clinical change of scales for the measurement of severity of symptoms and functional status were evaluated in a clinical study. The scales were highly reproducible (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = 0.91 and 0.93 for severity of symptoms and functional status, respectively) and internally consistent (Cronbach alpha, 0.89 and 0.91 for severity of symptoms and functional status, respectively). Both scales had positive, but modest or weak, correlations with two-point discrimination and Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing (Spearman coefficient, r = 0.12 to 0.42). In thirty-eight patients who were operated on in 1990 and were evaluated a median of fourteen months postoperatively, the mean symptom-severity score improved from 3.4 points preoperatively to 1.9 points at the latest follow-up examination, while the mean functional-status score improved from 3 to 2 points (5 points is the worst score and 1 point is the best score for each scale). Similar improvement was noted in twenty-six patients who were evaluated before and three months after the operation. We concluded that the scales for the measurement of severity of symptoms and functional status are reproducible, internally consistent, and responsive to clinical change, and that they measure dimensions of outcomes not captured by traditional measurements of impairment of the median nerve. These scales should enhance standardization of measurement of outcomes in studies of treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome.

0 comments Cited 152 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Book: not found

Análise de dados qualitativos: estratégias metodológicas para ciências da saúde, humanas e sociais

JCR PEREIRA, JCR Pereira, Júlio César Rodrigues PEREIRA … (2004)

0 comments Cited 120 times – based on 0 reviews

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

PubMed ID:: 24453576

PMC ID:: 3718414

DOI:: 10.1590/S1413-78522012000100005

Keywords: Knee,Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee,Scale,Questionnaires

Data availability:

Keywords: Knee, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, Scale, Questionnaires

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.