Multiple Sclerosis: Change in Health-Related Quality of Life Over Two Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional research has demonstrated poorer function and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in those with multiple sclerosis (MS) but less is known about change over time. The goals of this study were to measure change in HRQOL and identify factors associated with change. METHODS: HRQOL was assessed at baseline and annually over two subsequent years using the Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life Inventory. Function was assessed using the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Annualized rate of change was calculated for all twenty outcomes. Mixed effects modeling (univariate followed by multivariate) was used to examine the associations among patient characteristics and the age- and sex-adjusted Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) at study initiation and over the two years of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 300 participants, 288 (96%) provided at least one assessment and are included in this analysis. Although 14 of the 20 outcomes showed a mean decline, only two (SF-36 physical function, p=0.018 and the EDSS, p<0.001) were statistically significant. The SF-36 social function showed a significant improvement (p=0.031). Only two variables were significantly associated with a decreased rate of decline or improvement over two years, including being female (PCS, p=0.001) and use of visiting nurse services (MCS, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HRQOL is relatively stable over two years of follow-up, particularly for mentally-oriented outcomes. Further research with a longer period of follow-up is needed to provide additional insight into factors associated with change in HRQOL in patients with MS.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".