Development and Validation of a New Instrument to Measure Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: The VITACORA-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop/validate an instrument to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), for use in clinical studies. METHODS: An item pool of 35 items was generated following standardized procedures. Item reduction was performed using clinimetric and psychometric approaches after administration to 66 patients with PsA. The resulting instrument, the VITACORA-19, consists of 19 items. Its validity content, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, known groups/convergent validity, and sensitivity to change were tested in a longitudinal and multicenter study conducted in 10 hospitals in Spain, with 323 patients who also completed the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) and a health status transition item. There were 3 study groups: group A (n = 209, patients with PsA), group B (n = 71, patients with arthritis without psoriatic aspect, patients with arthrosis, and patients with dermatitis), and group C (n = 43, healthy controls). RESULTS: The questionnaire was considered easy/very easy to answer by 94.7% of the patients with PsA. The factorial analysis clearly identified only 1 factor. Cronbach's alpha coefficient and interclass correlation coefficients exceeded 0.90. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed between groups: subjects from group C had better HRQoL, followed by group B, and finally group A had the worst HRQoL. The VITACORA-19 scores showed significant correlations (p < 0.001) to PsA disease activity, EQ-5D, and perceived health state, scoring the patients with better health state higher. The minimum important difference was established as an 8-point change in the global score. CONCLUSION: The Spanish-developed VITACORA-19, designed to measure HRQoL in patients with PsA, has good validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".