Reproducibility, validity, and responsiveness of a disease-specific symptom questionnaire for gastroesophageal reflux disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to establish the reproducibility, validity, and responsiveness of a symptom questionnaire to assess patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). A total of 300 patients with GERD completed questionnaires before and 6 months after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Forty-six GERD patients who continued on omeprazole served as controls. Lower esophageal sphincter pressure, 24-h pH, and quality of life (SF36) were measured at baseline and follow-up. Reproducibility was calculated as an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) from a repeated-measures analysis of variance on symptom scores (SS) on two consecutive days. Validity was established by correlating SS with 24-h pH and SF36 scores. Responsiveness was calculated as the the ratio of the mean paired difference in score in the surgical group to the within-subject variability in control subjects. Reproducibility was very high, as revealed by an ICC of 0.92. Strong correlations between SS and SF36 scores at baseline and after surgery demonstrated high cross-sectional validity. Correlation between change in SS and change in pH, SF36 pain, general health, and physical health scores demonstrated longitudinal validity. The mean (95% confidence interval) paired differences in SS were 25.6 (23.7, 27.5) in the study and 2.0 (-3.2, 7.3) in the control groups, and the responsive index was 1.0. The estimated minimally important clinical difference was 7. We conclude that the symptom score is a reproducible, valid, and responsive instrument for assessing symptoms caused by GERD.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".