MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4385704694 · doi:10.1097/01.hs9.0000977504.69432.f9

PB2708: SYMPTOM BURDEN AND ITS IMPACT ON DAILY LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC MULTICENTRIC CASTLEMAN’S DISEASE (IMCD): AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF THE SURVEY’S INTERNAL CONSTRUCT VALIDITY

2023· article· en· W4385704694 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Franklin, Francis Shupo, Emily Jones, Nicola J. Mason, Grace Wayi-Wayi, Karan Kanhai, Natasa Zibelnick, Mileva Repasky, Kelly Makarounas‐Kirchmann, Sudipto Mukherjee, John Brazier

Notice bibliographique

RevueHemaSphere · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueViral-associated cancers and disorders
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineConstruct validityDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Likert scaleScale (ratio)Construct (python library)Physical therapyFamily medicineClinical psychologyInternal medicinePsychometricsPsychologyNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Topic: 36. Ethics and health economics Background: Idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) is a rare, life-threatening lymphoproliferative disorder characterized by systemic inflammatory symptoms, generalized lymphadenopathy, polyclonal lymphoproliferation, and multiple organ system dysfunction caused by a hyperinflammatory state. Patients experience high symptom burden and the mainstay of iMCD management is symptom control and preventing severe complications. Consequently, the quantification of symptoms and their impact on the daily lives could be a valuable clinical tool to monitor disease status, functional state, and response to treatment. Aims: Efforts to catalogue and understand how iMCD symptoms impact daily living from an international survey have been reported elsewhere. We conduct an exploratory analysis of the survey’s psychometric properties in terms of internal construct validity (i.e., assessing against factors in the same questionnaire with a similar construct) to assess its suitability for the generation of a Symptom Burden Scale. Methods: An online symptom burden survey specifically tailored to iMCD, was developed, based on literature and clinical expert advice. This survey was distributed within iMCD communities in Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US through the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network (CDCN). Ethics approval and patient consent were obtained. Following analysis of the responses relating to symptom burden, their severity (measured on a Likert scale: range 0-4), and the impact on their daily lives, exploratory analyses regarding the strength of the relationship between symptoms and their impact on daily activities were undertaken. Firstly, interviews with clinicians, patients and caregivers were conducted to understand whether response could be grouped as the same or related to one another. If items were related, the expected strength of the relationship and, for the clinical expert interviews only, the potential direction of relationship, were further explored. Secondly, hypotheses were generated a priori from these interviews and tested to establish the construct, convergent and discriminant validity of the survey. Spearman’s rank absolute correlation strength associated p-value, and Cohen’s d standardized effect size methods were utilized. Results: The survey was implemented from April–November 2020, with 51 respondents reporting confirmed iMCD diagnosis from a healthcare practitioner. Patients were predominantly female (56.9%), of mean age of 47.4 years (SD 11.9) and white (74.5%). The mean number of symptoms reported was 6.7 (SD: 5.2, Range: 0-22). Three a priori hypothesis sets were generated: 1. How specific symptoms relate to each other; 2. Number of symptoms and their relationship with aspects of daily life; and 3. Receiving treatment and the overall relationship with aspects of daily life. Although the results did support or negate all a priori hypotheses, a strong significant correlation between having a higher number of symptoms and greater adverse impact on daily life was identified. Summary/Conclusion: Despite sample size limitations for complex statistical analyses, this exploratory analysis provides confidence in the internal construct validity of the survey. It supports use of this disease burden questionnaire as a tool for the assessment of patients’ symptom state and evaluation of response in daily practice or clinical research. Keywords: Castleman’s disease, Patient

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,542

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,282
Écart entre enseignants0,259 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHemaSphereMême sujetViral-associated cancers and disordersTravaux en français237 207