MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of the disease: acceptability, ceiling and floor effects and reliability of an instrument on heart failure

2013· article· en· W2144306143 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaCeiling (cloud)Intraclass correlationCeiling effectInternal consistencyMedicineReliability (semiconductor)Physical therapyPsychometricsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the acceptability, ceiling/floor effects, and the reliability of the instrument for measuring the Impact of the Disease on the Daily Life of Patients with Valvular Disease (IDCV) when applied to 135 patients with heart failure (HF). Acceptability was evaluated by the percentage of unanswered items and by the proportion of patients who responded to all items; the ceiling/floor effects by the percentage of patients who scored in the top of 10% best and worst results of the scale, respectively. Reliability was estimated by internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient) and stability of the measure (intraclass correlation coefficient - ICC). All patients responded to all items. Ceiling/floor effects evidenced were of moderate magnitude. The Cronbach's alpha was satisfactory for the majority of the domains and ICC> 0.90 in all the domains. The IDCV proved to be an easy to understand questionnaire, with evidence of reliability in patients with HF.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.289 · 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