The primary exploration in clinical value of the CLSA ⁃ EA questionnaire (Chinese version) in adult epilepsy screening
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective To evaluate the reliability, validity and diagnostic accuracy of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Epilepsy Algorithm (CLSA-EA) questionnaire (Chinese version) in screening Chinese adult epilepsy. Methods From August to October 2022, a total of 384 subjects and patients were included, who were respectively screened from urban and rural communities in Chengdu, Sichuan, and Department of Neurology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University. The CLSA - EA questionnaire (Chinese version) was used for the survey. Epilepsy was diagnosed according to 2014 International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) criteria. Kappa coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient were used to evaluate testretest reliability and internal consistency, respectively. Construct validity was used to test validity. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic consistency κ value were calculated by confusion matrix method to evaluate the effect of screening. Results Finally, 348 questionnaires were obtained, including 190 epileptic cases (54.60%) and 158 nonepileptic cases (45.40%), of which 244 were retested subjects, including 123 epileptic cases (50.41%) and 121 non-epileptic cases (49.59%). Retest reliability analysis in epileptic cases showed that the consistency of items Q3a, Q3bⅲ , Q3bⅳ , Q4a and Q4b in CLSA-EA questionnaire (Chinese version) had moderate consistency (0.400 ≤ κ < 0.750; P = 0.000, for all). Items Q1, Q2, Q3bⅰ, Q3bⅱ, Q3bⅴ, Q3bⅵ and Q3bⅶ had poor consistency (0.000 ≤ κ < 0.400; P < 0.05, for all). In non-epileptic cases, the consistencies of items Q2, Q3a, Q3bⅰ, Q4a and Q4b were moderate (P = 0.000, for all), Q3bⅴ and Q3bⅵ were poor (P = 0.000, for all), and no consistencies of Q3bⅱ , Q3bⅲ and Q3bⅳ were found (P > 0.05, for all). The internal consistency evaluation in epileptic cases showed that the internal consistency of all items and the sum of all items in the CLSA-EA questionnaire (Chinese version) were poor (Cronbach's α coefficient < 0.700). The internal consistency of items Q4a and Q4b for non-epileptic patients was also poor, but other items and the sum of all items were acceptable (Cronbach's α coefficient 0.700-0.800). The structural validity analysis showed that the cumulative variance contribution rate of the four factors was only 43%, and items Q1 and Q3a were not incorporated into the factors. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and consistency of CLSA -EA2 epilepsy determination algorithm were higher (> 0.900, for all). Conclusions The CLSA - EA questionnaire (Chinese version) has high sensitivity and specificity, which can guide the preliminary screening of epilepsy in China. However, the applicability, reliability and validity still need to be further considered.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».