P091 <break /> Development of a disease knowledge questionnaire for patients with interstitial lung disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Disease education plays an important role in the comprehensive care of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). No tool has been developed to assess disease knowledge in these patients. Aim: To develop a bilingual (French and English), reliable and easy to use questionnaire assessing disease knowledge in patients with ILD. Methods: An initial questionnaire of 40 potential items was generated after a comprehensive literature review. Twenty content experts qualitatively and quantitatively reviewed each item for inclusion in the final questionnaire. Initially developed in French, it was translated to English using the forward and backward translation method. The questionnaire was pre-tested in 20 ILD patients of each language to assess for the readability and clarity of the questions. Forty additional patients (20 French, 20 English) completed the questionnaire twice to determine its internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Results: The final questionnaire included 18 items rated as essential by experts (content validity ratio = p < 0.05). Internal consistency of the questionnaire was satisfactory, with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.76 in French and 0.77 in English. Test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 in French and 0.74 in English.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".