MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746883961 · doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0737-2

Responsiveness of the PROMIS® measures to changes in disease status among pediatric nephrotic syndrome patients: a Midwest pediatric nephrology consortium study

2017· article· en· W2746883961 on OpenAlexaff
David T. Selewski, Jonathan P. Troost, Danyelle Cummings, Susan F. Massengill, Rasheed Gbadegesin, Larry A. Greenbaum, Ibrahim F. Shatat, Yi Cai, Gaurav Kapur, Diane Hébert, Michael J.G. Somers, Howard Trachtman, Priya Pais, Michael E. Seifert, Jens Goebel, Christine B. Sethna, John D. Mahan, Heather E. Gross, Emily Herreshoff, Yang Liu, Noelle E. Carlozzi, Bryce B. Reeve, Darren A. DeWalt, Debbie S. Gipson

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillUniversity of California, Los AngelesNational Institutes of HealthGeorgetown UniversityUniversity of PittsburghUniversity of WashingtonNorthwestern UniversityChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia
KeywordsMedicineNephrotic syndromeNephrologyInternal medicineMEDLINEQuality of life (healthcare)Quality of Life ResearchKidney diseaseDiseaseIntensive care medicinePediatricsGerontologyPublic healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nephrotic syndrome represents a condition in pediatric nephrology typified by a relapsing and remitting course, proteinuria and the presence of edema. The PROMIS measures have previously been studied and validated in cross-sectional studies of children with nephrotic syndrome. This study was designed to longitudinally validate the PROMIS measures in pediatric nephrotic syndrome. METHODS: One hundred twenty seven children with nephrotic syndrome between the ages of 8 and 17 years participated in this prospective cohort study. Patients completed a baseline assessment while their nephrotic syndrome was active, a follow-up assessment at the time of their first complete proteinuria remission or study month 3 if no remission occurred, and a final assessment at study month 12. Participants completed six PROMIS measures (Mobility, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Depressive Symptoms, Anxiety, and Peer Relationships), the PedsQL version 4.0, and two global assessment of change items. RESULTS: Disease status was classified at each assessment: nephrotic syndrome active in 100% at baseline, 33% at month 3, and 46% at month 12. The PROMIS domains of Mobility, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Depressive Symptoms, and Anxiety each showed a significant overall improvement over time (p < 0.001). When the PROMIS measures were compared to the patients' global assessment of change, the domains of Mobility, Fatigue, Pain Interference, and Anxiety consistently changed in an expected fashion. With the exception of Pain Interference, change in PROMIS domain scores did not correlate with changes in disease activity. PROMIS domain scores were moderately correlated with analogous PedsQL domain scores. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the PROMIS Mobility, Fatigue, Pain Interference, and Anxiety domains are sensitive to self-reported changes in disease and overall health status over time in children with nephrotic syndrome. The lack of significant anchoring to clinically defined nephrotic syndrome disease active and remission status may highlight an opportunity to improve the measurement of HRQOL in children with nephrotic syndrome through the development of a nephrotic syndrome disease-specific HRQOL measure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations28
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth and Quality of Life OutcomesSame topicRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesFrench-language works237,207