MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1905333318

Quality of life in women with fibromyalgia syndrome: validation of the QIF, the French version of the fibromyalgia impact questionnaire.

2003· article· en· W1905333318 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Serge Perrot, Dominique Dumont, Françis Guillemin, J. Pouchot, Joël Coste

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibromyalgiaPhysical therapyIntraclass correlationQuality of life (healthcare)Test (biology)Reliability (semiconductor)PsychometricsClinical psychologyNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To validate a translated and adapted version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) for use in French-speaking populations. METHODS: The FIQ was translated into French by 2 independent translators and then back-translated into English to assess the conceptual equivalence. The translated version was tested and adapted by an expert committee to obtain the Questionnaire de mesure d'Impact de la Fibromyalgie (QIF), the French version of the FIQ. We administered the QIF to 102 women with fibromyalgia (FM): 71 women who consulted once, and 31 women who were follow for 3 visits (D0, M1, and M3). The patients were also asked to answer 4 other questionnaires: the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 (SF-36), the short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2 (AIMS2), and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) (for psychiatric assessment). To ensure test-retest reliability, the patients were asked to complete the QIF 7 days after the first visit and to send it back to the investigators by mail. During each visit, all patients were asked about pain intensity. A tender point count was obtained by thumb palpation and the tenderness threshold of each specific point was assessed by a 4-point scale score to determine the global tender point index. RESULTS: No major cultural adaptation was needed to obtain the French version of the FIQ. Test-retest reliability coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficient) for each question ranged from 0.04 to 0.84. Two items from the QIF (number of days when the patient felt good and visual analog scale stiffness) did not reach significant levels of test-retest reliability. Internal validity was good. The QIF score correlated well with the SF-36 and AIMS2 scores. The psychological aspects of the QIF were well correlated with those of GHQ-28. None of the items from the McGill Pain Questionnaire was correlated with QIF items. Similarly the clinical data concerning pain assessment were not correlated with QIF items. CONCLUSIONS: QIF is a valid instrument for measuring functional disability and health status in French women with FM. Some of the items were of a limited reliability, perhaps due to the variability of the multiple aspects of this syndrome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207