The French-Canadian validation of a disease-specific, patient-reported outcome measure for lupus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this paper is to perform the cross-cultural validation of the French version of the LupusPRO, a disease-targeted patient-reported outcome measure, among systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients in Canada. METHODS: The French version of the LupusPRO and the MOS SF-36 were administered; demographic, clinical and serological characteristics were obtained. Disease activity (SELENA-SLEDAI and the Lupus Foundation of America definition of flare) and damage (SLICC/ACR SDI) were assessed. Physician disease activity and damage assessments were ascertained using visual analog scales. Internal consistency reliability (ICR), test-retest reliability (TRT), convergent and discriminant validity (against corresponding domains of the SF-36), criterion validity (against disease activity, damage or health status) and known group validity were tested. RESULTS: A total of 99 French-Canadian SLE patients participated (97% women, mean (SD) age 45.2 (14.5) years). The median (IQR) SELENA-SLEDAI and SDI were 3.5 (6.0) and 1.0 (2.0), respectively. The ICR of the LupusPRO domains ranged from 0.81 to 0.93 (except for lupus symptoms, procreation and coping), while TRT ranged from 0.72 to 0.95. Convergent and discriminant validity, criterion validity and known group validity against disease activity, damage and health status measures were observed. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good fit. CONCLUSION: The LupusPRO has fair psychometric properties among French-Canadian patients with SLE.
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 | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".