MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Preliminary International Validation of the Quality of Life in Myelodysplasia Scale (QUALMS)

2014· article· en· W2532235959 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gregory A. Abel, Fabio Efficace, Rena Buckstein, Sara Tinsley, Joseph G. Jurcic, Yolanda Martins, David P. Steensma, Corey D. Watts, Azra Raza, Alan F. List, Robert J. Klaassen

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)International Prognostic Scoring SystemMedicinePsychosocialScale (ratio)TransplantationGerontologyMyelodysplastic syndromesInternal medicinePsychiatryBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Disease-specific measures of quality of life (QOL) can allow for improved assessment of disease-specific symptomatology and psychosocial factors. We recently reported on the development of the QUALMS, a 33-item QOL assessment tool for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We now report preliminary internal consistency and validity results from an international prospective study. Methods: From December of 2013 to July of 2014,an international cohort of MDS patients completed the QUALMS as well as the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Anemia Scale (FACT-An). Eligible patients were 18 or older, and had to have biopsy-proven MDS; those who had undergone stem cell transplantation were excluded. Baseline medical record review was performed at the time of enrollment to document key clinical and laboratory data, including bone marrow pathology and treatments; a second QUALMS administration and medical record review is planned for each patient to assess responsiveness. Participants were recruited from MDS centers across the United States, Canada and Italy. Individual QUALMS items were scored on a 5-point scale ranging from “Never” to “Always”. Overall mean score was calculated by transforming the raw mean to a 100 point scale, with higher scores indicating better MDS-related QOL. Baseline QUALMS scores were compared to clinical factors such as hemoglobin (Hg) and transfusion dependence as well as with scores on the other QOL scales. Preliminary exploratory factor analysis was also undertaken to identify candidate subscales. Results: As of this analysis, 201 patients had enrolled. The mean age was 71.7 years; there were 55% men, and the IPSS distribution was 44% LO, 43% INT-1, 10% INT-2, 1% HI and 2% unclassifiable. The majority of patients (53%) were receiving an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent, hypomethylating agent or lenalidomide, and 29% of the overall cohort was transfusion-dependent. The geographical distribution was as follows: 20% from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, MA); 9% from Columbia University (New York, NY); 15% from the Moffitt Cancer Center (Tampa, FL); 25% from the Odette Cancer Center (Toronto, Canada); and 31% from two GIMEMA hospitals (Rome and Sardegna, Italy). Scores on the QUALMS ranged from 19 to 78; the mean and median scores were 49.6 and 50.0 respectively. The measure had excellent internal consistency (α=.91), and was moderately correlated with the EORTC QLQ-C30: correlations (r’s) with the global health status scale, functional scales (i.e., physical, role, emotional, cognitive and social) as well as fatigue, nausea and pain scales ranged from 0.33 to 0.63 (all p’s <.001). Moderate correlations were also found with the FACT Anemia Score and the FACT Trial Outcomes Index (r’s 0.70 and 0.73; p’s <.001). Patients with Hg less than 10 had consistently lower QUALMS scores than those with higher Hg (46.9 v 51.7, p =.008), as did those who were transfusion-dependent (44.3 v 52.1; p <.001). QUALMS scores significantly differed between those with lower (LO/INT-1) versus higher (INT-2/HI) IPSS scores (50.0 v 44.3, p <.05). Finally, preliminary factor analysis revealed several potentially useful QUALMS subscales, including physical burden, emotional burden, disease information and uncertainty, and disease-associated positives. Conclusions: Our analyses suggest that the QUALMS is a valid measure of disease-specific QOL in MDS. As would be expected, it is moderately (but not highly) related to measures of cancer- and anemia-related QOL, but contributes unique, disease-specific QOL information valued by patients. The QUALMS is a new tool that promises to help clinicians and researchers to better evaluate MDS-specific QOL in the modern treatment era. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.292 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→