MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 19586: Impact of Dyspnea: From Validity Indices to the Clinical Utility of the French-canadian Version of the Modified Dyspnea Index

2014· article· en· W2884047483 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michel Doré, Maria Cecília Bueno Jayme Gallani, Steeve Provencher, Paul Poirier, Camille Gagné, Céline Gélinas

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary function testingQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyDLCOVital capacityInternal medicineBody mass indexLung functionCardiologyDiffusing capacityLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Dyspnea is a cardinal symptom among patients with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Its underlying mechanisms are complex, including pathophysiological as well as psychological and environmental factors. There is no gold standard to its evaluation and it has been recognized that multidimensional tools could provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the symptom. Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to examine the validation of the scores of the French-Canadian version of the Modified Dyspnea Index(MDI), a multidimensional measure of dyspnea, among chronic cardiovascular and pulmonary patients. Methods: This study includes 137 patients: 79 with pulmonary arterial hypertension and 58 with interstitial lung disease. The cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the MDI were already reported. The hypothesis guiding the test of convergent validity were that the final score of MDI, which reflects the intensity of dyspnea and its functional impact, would have correlations with: pulmonary function (forced vital capacity-FVC and FVC%), physical capacity (6 Minutes Walk Test-6MWT and Veterans Specific Activity Questionnaire-VSAQ), the practice of physical activity (Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire - GSLTPAQ) and quality of life (SF-12). Partial correlations were performed controlling theses variables: diagnosis, age, sex, BMI, and schooling. Results: The following correlations were observed between the total score of MDI and the reference variables: FVC 0.36 ( p<0.001 ); FVC% 0.29 ( p=0.008 ); 6MWT 0.58 ( p<0.001 ); VSAQ 0.77 ( p<0.001 ); GSLTPAQ 0.50 ( p<0.001 ); SF12-Physical Component 0.73 ( p<0.001 ); SF12-Mental Comp. 0.31 ( p<0.001 ). Conclusions: The results confirmed the associations hypothesized. The total score of the MDI explained much more the variance of the quality of life and perceived physical capacity, than lung function explained the MDI score. It is aligned with the described impact of the symptom in the daily life of the patient and the complexity of the factors underlying its triggering and perception. The use of the MDI can be very helpful in the clinical follow-up, guiding the choice of the best therapeutic approach and evaluation the outcomes of the interventions implemented.

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)0.011
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 score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→