Abstract 16166: Validation of a of Self-Reported Measure of Physical Capacity in the Context of Chronic Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The assessment of physical capacity (PC) is relevant to estimate prognosis and guide therapeutics for patients with chronic cardiopulmonary disease. The Veterans Specific Activity Questionnaire (VSAQ) is a self-reported tool designed to assess perceived physical capacity in METs according to a given patient’s level of physical activity limited by symptoms. The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the score of the French-Canadian version of the VSAQ among patients suffering from cardiovascular symptoms and chronic pulmonary diseases. Methods: A total of 140 subjects referred for treadmill testing (TT group) and 134 patients with pulmonary hypertension or interstitial lung disease (PD group) were enrolled. Criterion validation was verified in the TT group by level of agreement (Bland-Altman coefficient) between the VSAQ and the workload estimated by the gold standard to assess PC, the maximal treadmill test (MTT). Convergent validation was tested using correlations between the VSAQ score and physical capacity (MTT and 6-min walking test - 6MWT); practice of physical activity (Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire-GSLTPAQ); pulmonary function (forced vital capacity- FVC) and quality of life (Minnesota living with Heart Failure Questionnaire-LHFQ and SF-12). Partial correlation coefficients were adjusted for sex, age, BMI and education. Results: The mean bias between VSAQ and estimated METs was -1.54 with limits of agreement (CI 95%) of 3.71 to -6.79 METs, being constant around all MET levels. Significant correlations (p <0.05) between the VSAQ score in the TT sample were 0.65 with MTT, 0.20 with the GSLTPAQ; -0.36; -0.39 and -0.29 with the LHFQ total score, physical and emotional domains. Significant correlations (p <0.05) for the PD sample were: 0.58 with 6MWT; 0.43 with FVC (interstitial lung disease only); 0.31 with GSLTPAQ; and 0.65 and 0.24 with SF-12 physical and emotional components. Conclusion: The VSAQ French-Canadian version demonstrated acceptable criterion and convergent validation among two different groups of chronic disease patients. Its utilization by the nurse during routine clinical follow-up of these patients could be helpful to guide functional evaluations and interventions.
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 | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".