ArticleMusculoskeletal surgery2025
The Italian version of the Majeed pelvic score: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation.
Article in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe assessment of functional outcomes after pelvic ring fracture remains a controversial topic. The Majeed pelvic score (MPS) is the most commonly used pelvic-specific questionnaire in the literature. The aim of this study is translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian version of MPS.
methodsThe study was articulated in two phases. Phase 1 consisted in translation and cross-cultural adaptation of MPS, from English into Italian. The psychometric properties were tested on 52 Italian patients (Phase 2). Construct validity was assessed by correlation with Short-Form 12 (SF-12). 33 patients repeated the questionnaire after 14 days to assess its reproducibility. All data were subsequently analyzed (descriptive statistics, multitrait analysis, reliability and construct validity assessment).
resultsThe questionnaire was clear and easily understood (no missing data). A ceiling effect was detected for all items of the scale. Multitrait analysis showed good results for each outcome measure, except for the item "walking distance" that showed poor item discriminant validity. A significant correlation between the MPS and the physical component summary (PCS) of the SF-12 was found, while there was a weak correlation with the mental component summary (MCS). The questionnaire showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.91-0.99) and very good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.92-0.96).
conclusionsThe Italian version of the MPS has demonstrated to be reliable and valid in the evaluation of patients with pelvic ring fractures. There is still however a need for an instrument capable of evaluating the mental component in these types of injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.