Validation of the University of California San Diego Performance-based Skills Assessment (UPSA) in major depressive disorder: Replication and extension of initial findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The University of California San Diego Performance-based Skills Assessment (UPSA) has been validated as a functional measure in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The study herein aims to both replicate and extend the initial validation incorporating data sets from two additional studies. METHODS: NCT02279966 and NCT02272517 were multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in adult outpatients with moderate-to-severe MDD and a current major depressive episode of ≥3 months and less than 1 year, respectively. Subjects were randomized to vortioxetine (10 or 20 mg), placebo or active reference drug (paroxetine [20 mg], or escitalopram [10 or 20 mg]) for 8 weeks. Pearson correlation coefficients were estimated for baseline UPSA-Brief (UPSA-B), demographic/disease characteristics, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Perceived Deficit Questionnaire-20 items (PDQ-20), and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), to examine construct validity. Distribution- and anchor-based methods examined clinically important difference (CID) threshold. A pooled analysis with data from NCT01564862 (initial validation study) was performed to increase the statistical power of the estimations. RESULTS: In pooled analysis of the two new studies, UPSA-B score correlated with the DSST (r = 0.32, P < 0.0001), but not the MADRS (r = -0.07, p = 0.302) or the PDQ-20 (r = -0.10, p = 0.109), replicating initial validation results. Estimated CID range was 7.1-11.2 and 5.5-6.1 points for anchor- and distribution-based methods, respectively. In pooled analyses of all three studies, the CID was 7.0 and 6.4 for anchor- and distribution-based methods, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the construct validity of UPSA for assessing functional capacity in patients with MDD. Estimated CID using UPSA is approximately 6-7 points. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01564862; NCT02272517; NCT02279966.
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 | 0.064 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".