The RCP’s ‘Three Key Questions’ for asthma: review of practical use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessment tools are a vital component of chronic disease management. The Royal College of Physicians has developed a patient-focused outcome measure for the treatment of asthma, the 'Three Key Questions'. However, in a study investigating the goals of people with asthma, several issues related to the tool emerged. Forty-seven adults of a range of ages and asthma severity but with no significant co-morbidity were interviewed. It emerged that the outcome measure may be subject to recall bias. Also, symptom reports may be conflated if daytime symptoms also occur with activity. 'Interference with activity' is a subjective term the interpretation of which varies considerably. Changes in the level of activity undertaken may be reported rather than changes in symptom severity. The 'Three Key Questions' are not fully patient-centred because they assess the presence of symptoms rather than their importance to the individual. The use of the 'Three Key Questions' as an outcome measure may not allow valid comparisons to be made between settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".