Qualitative Research to Explore the Patient Experience of X-Linked Hypophosphatemia and Evaluate the Suitability of the BPI-SF and WOMAC® as Clinical Trial End Points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by renal phosphate wasting and defective bone mineralization. Symptoms include bone pain, joint pain, stiffness, and fatigue. Published evidence regarding the patient experience of XLH is sparse and no XLH-specific outcome measures have been validated. OBJECTIVES: To understand the symptoms, impacts, and patient experience of XLH and to evaluate the face and content validity of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC®) and the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) for use as end points in XLH clinical trials. METHODS: Face-to-face, qualitative, semistructured interviews were conducted with 18 adults with XLH in the United States using concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing techniques. Open-ended questioning elicited spontaneous concepts focusing on XLH-associated symptoms and functional limitations. Cognitive debriefing of the WOMAC® and BPI-SF assessed the relevance and patient understanding of item wording, recall period, and response options. RESULTS: Various distinct symptom concepts were elicited including pain symptoms, dental symptoms, sensory symptoms, tiredness/fatigue symptoms, and musculoskeletal symptoms. Participants reported experiencing significant bone and joint pain, stiffness, mobility limitations, and an impact on their ability to work. Cognitive interviewing found both instruments to be relevant and well understood by most patients. CONCLUSIONS: The interviews generated rich, qualitative insights into the patient experience of XLH. Cognitive debriefing of the BPI-SF and WOMAC® supported their value as XLH clinical trial end points. Future research will assess the psychometric properties of these instruments for use in the XLH population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.052 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".