Methods for shortening patient-reported outcome measures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome measures are widely used to assess patient experiences, well-being, and treatment response in clinical trials and cohort-based observational studies. However, patients may be asked to respond to many different measures in order to provide researchers and clinicians with a wide array of information regarding their experiences. Collecting such long and cumbersome patient-reported outcome measures may burden patients, increase research costs, and potentially reduce the quality of the data collected. Nonetheless, little research has been conducted on replicable, and reproducible methods to shorten these instruments that result in shortened forms of minimal length. This manuscript proposes the use of mixed integer programming through Optimal Test Assembly as a method to shorten patient-reported outcome measures. This method is compared to the existing standard in the field, which is selecting items based on having high discrimination parameters from an item response theory model. The method is then illustrated in an application to a fatigue scale for patients with Systemic Sclerosis.
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.
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 | 0.328 | 0.969 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it