MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019310464 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.140143

Longitudinal Evaluation of PROMIS-29 and FACIT-Dyspnea Short Forms in Systemic Sclerosis

2014· article· en· W2019310464 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Monique Hinchcliff, Jennifer L. Beaumont, Mary Carns, Sofia Podlusky, Krishna Thavarajah, John Varga, David Cella, Rowland W. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNorthwestern UniversityEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentScleroderma Research FoundationNational Institutes of HealthScleroderma Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyPatient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemQuality of life (healthcare)SF-36Computerized adaptive testingInternal medicineDiseasePsychometricsHealth related quality of life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the sensitivity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-item Health Profile (PROMIS-29) and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Dyspnea 10-item short form (FACIT-Dyspnea) for measuring change in health status and dyspnea in systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: One hundred patients with SSc completed the PROMIS-29, FACIT-Dyspnea, and traditional instruments [Medical Research Council Dyspnea Score, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36)] at baseline and 1-year visits. PROMIS-29, FACIT-Dyspnea, and traditional instrument change scores were compared across composite modified Medsger Disease Severity and modified Rodnan Skin score (mRSS) change groups. RESULTS: Moderately high Spearman correlation coefficients were observed between FACIT-Dyspnea and SGRQ (r = 0.57), FACIT-Dyspnea functional limitations and SF-36 physical component summary (PCS; r = 0.51), PROMIS-29 physical functioning and HAQ-DI (r = 0.50), and SF-36 PCS (r = 0.52) change scores. In most validity comparisons, PROMIS-29, FACIT-Dyspnea, HAQ-DI, and SF-36 scores performed similarly. While PROMIS-29 covers more content areas than SF-36 (e.g., sleep), it may do so at the expense of responsiveness of its 4-item physical function scale as compared to the multiitem-derived SF-36 PCS. Statistically significant increases in SF-36 role physical (p = 0.01) and physical component scale (p = 0.016), but not PROMIS-29, were observed in patients with mRSS improvement. CONCLUSION: PROMIS-29 and FACIT-Dyspnea are valid instruments to measure health status and dyspnea in patients with SSc. In physical function assessment, longer PROMIS short forms or computer adaptive testing should be considered to improve responsiveness to the effect of skin disease changes on physical function in patients with SSc.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207