MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2310185384 · doi:10.14288/1.0073856

Health outcome measures in an aging population : validity, reliability and interpretability

2013· article· en· W2310185384 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erin M. Macri

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityReliability (semiconductor)Outcome (game theory)PopulationPsychologyMedicineGerontologyComputer scienceEnvironmental healthArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, older adults currently represent a record high proportion of about 15% of the population. Associated with aging is the increased prevalence of multiple morbidity, resulting in widely varied and complex health statuses among our aged. Identifying effective strategies to promote healthy aging and reduce comorbidity hinges on the ability to accurately measure health outcomes. This requires the use of valid and reliable instruments with associated reference statistics to enhance interpretability of test scores. In Chapter 2, I present a validity study of a patient-reported outcome measure, the Patellofemoral Pain and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale (PFOOS). The PFOOS is designed to evaluate symptoms relating to patellofemoral (PF) pain and osteoarthritis. I recruited 54 adults aged 18+ with peri- or retro-patellar pain for ≥ 3 months, rated ≥3/10 on a numeric pain scale, aggravated by PF-loading tasks (e.g. squats). People with diffuse knee pain, history of total knee or hip replacement, or severe knee trauma in the past year were excluded. Recruitment was done through adverts to staff & students at an Australian University. Participants completed paper & online versions of the PFOOS, Anterior Knee Pain Scale and SF-36, and repeated the PFOOS in 1-2 weeks. Analysis included internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), test-retest & alternate forms reliability (ICC), and construct validation (hypothesis testing). ICCs were ≥ 0.79, Cronbach’s α ≥ 0.61. The PFOOS performed largely as hypothesized. Overall, the PFOOS demonstrated good validity & reliability in this sample. In Chapter 3, I report results of a cross-sectional study aimed to develop normative data for the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI). The DEMMI is a performance-based instrument that measures mobility across a spectrum from bed bound to functional independent mobility. A sample of 183 healthy, community-dwelling adults age 60+ were recruited. Mean DEMMI scores varied by age category, by living arrangement (independent vs. assisted living), and by use of mobility aid (p<0.05). Scores did not differ by sex (p=0.49) or falls history (p=0.21). Reference intervals were provided for individual and group comparison, to facilitate use of the DEMMI across the mobility spectrum in clinical and research 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→