Health related quality of life in genital herpes: a pilot comparison of measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genital herpes (GH) is a common sexually transmitted infection. Novel tools for the control of GH (for example, tests and vaccines) are emerging, but optimal assessment of the cost effectiveness of such interventions requires scaled, preference based estimates of the impact of GH on health related quality of life. METHODS: We provided self administered interviews to 39 individuals with recurrent GH recruited from an STD clinic and a GH support group in southern Ontario, Canada. Health preference estimates were generated using visual analogue scales (VAS), a time-tradeoff approach (TTO) and the Health Utilities Index Mark-II (HUI-II). Quality of life was also assessed with the Recurrent Genital Herpes Quality of Life scale (RGHQoL). RESULTS: Average (SD) health values for asymptomatic and symptomatic genital herpes were 0.89 (0.21) and 0.89 (0.22) using TTO, and 0.76 (0.30) and 0.71 (0.30) using VAS. Health utility estimates generated with HUI-II for transient symptomatic and asymptomatic health states were 0.93 (0.08) and 0.80 (0.16). Log transformed health value estimates exhibited convergent validity when compared to RGHQoL, as did health utility estimates for symptomatic GH. Utility scores for symptomatic GH increased (improved) with increasing age; no other subject characteristic was predictive of preference weights. CONCLUSIONS: Preference based measures of health related quality of life can be elicited with relative ease in the context of genital herpes, and preference weights are correlated with quality of life scores generated using the RGHQoL. Generation of preference weights will permit direct comparison of the economic attractiveness of herpes prevention interventions with that of other commonly available health 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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".