Incat disability score: A critical analysis of its measurement properties
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The INCAT (Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment) disability score is a measure of activity limitation. It is used frequently as a primary endpoint in inflammatory polyneuropathy clinical trials. A comprehensive critical analysis of its measurement properties has not been performed. METHODS: Critical analysis of measurement properties. RESULTS: The INCAT disability score was derived based on items from Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS), a disability measure intended for application in multiple sclerosis. Strengths of the INCAT score include evaluation of upper and lower limb dysfunction, ease of administration (feasibility), high face validity, and high reliability. Weaknesses of the scale include concerns about methodological quality of validation studies; failure to properly capture activity limitations due to proximal arm weakness, or fatigue; heavy individual item weighting; and poor sensitivity for detection of clinically important change. CONCLUSIONS: Although the INCAT scale has been an effective tool in inflammatory polyneuropathy studies, its limitations may warrant development of new scales.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it