MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

148. SHORT-FORM 36 AS A MEASURE OF HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH GIANT CELL ARTERITIS

2019· article· en· W2932209468 on OpenAlexaff
Tanaz A. Kermani, Antoine G. Sreih, Gunnar Tómasson, David Cuthbertson, Renée Borchin, Simon Carette, Lindsy Forbess, Nader Khalidi, Curry L. Koening, Carol A. McAlear, Paul A. Monach, Larry W. Moreland, Christian Pagnoux, Philip Seo, Robert Spiera, Kenneth J. Warrington, Steven R. Ytterberg, Carol A. Langford, Peter A. Merkel

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph's HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGiant cell arteritisMeasure (data warehouse)Quality of life (healthcare)ArteritisQuality (philosophy)Internal medicineVasculitisDiseaseData miningNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To evaluate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with giant cell arteritis (GCA) as measured by the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Methods: Data from the first visit of patients with GCA enrolled in a multicenter, longitudinal cohort and/or a clinical trial were included. Subjects were followed with standardized clinical assessments including symptoms attributed to vasculitis, physician global assessment of disease activity (0-10 with 0 signifying remission), the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI), and SF-36. Physical component scores (PCS) and mental component scores (MCS) were calculated from SF-36 and normalized to the general population (mean ± SD = 50 ± 10) with lower scores indicating poorer HRQoL. The domains of Physical Function (PF), Role Physical (RP), Bodily Pain (BP), General Health perceptions (GH), Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), Role Emotional (RE), Mental Health index (MH) were also evaluated. Results: The study included 304 patients; 220 (72%) women; mean age at diagnosis = 71.3±8.5 years; 58% enrolled within 12 weeks of diagnosis. Temporal artery biopsy was positive in 165/205 (81%) patients. Visual manifestations were present in 38%, upper extremity claudication in 18%, and lower extremity claudication in 6%. Disease was characterized as being in remission in 57% of patients. At least one damage item was present in 58%. Mean±SD PCS (39.7±11.5) and MCS (47.2±12.8) were statistically lower in patients with GCA compared to the general population, p < 0.01. PCS were lower in females (37.8 vs 43.3 in males, p < 0.01), patients with any damage item on VDI (38.0 vs 41.3 in patients with VDI=0, p 0.02) and patients with active disease (37.7 vs 41.3 in remission, p 0.01). Mean MCS was lower in patients with active disease (45.7 vs 48.8 in remission, p 0.04). There were no differences in PCS or MCS in patients with i) recently diagnosed disease, ii) with/without vision loss, iii) with/without upper or lower extremity claudication (p > 0.05). Domains of PF and BP were statistically lower in females, patients with damage had lower PF scores. Patients with active disease had lower RP, BP, VT, SF and MH scores Figure 1. SF-36 scores among patients with giant cell arteritis. Left panel: Differences in physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) in patients with active and inactive disease (solid line represents the general population). Right panel: Differences in domains of Physical Function (PF), Role Physical (RP), Bodily Pain (BP), General Health perceptions (GH), Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), Role Emotional (RE), and Mental Health index (MH) in patients with giant cell arteritis based on presence or absence of active disease, and compared to the general population (GP). Conclusion: Patients with GCA have reduced HRQoL, as measured by the SF-36. While SF-36 appears sensitive to disease activity, it did not differ in patients with serious manifestations such as vision loss or limb claudication which would be expected to impact quality of life. Disease-specific measures may better capture the burden of disease from the patient’s perspective in GCA.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207