MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980481522 · doi:10.2196/14397

Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Patients With Severe Lower Extremity Trauma (LIMB-Q): Protocol for a Multiphase Mixed Methods Study

2019· article· en· W2980481522 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lily R. Mundy, Anne F. Klassen, A. Jordan Grier, Matthew J. Carty, Andrea L. Pusic, Scott T. Hollenbeck, Mark J. Gage

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebriefingRasch modelProtocol (science)PsychologyAmputationThink aloud protocolPhysical therapyQualitative researchPatient-reported outcomeApplied psychologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationClinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)PsychotherapistSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A current limitation in the care of patients with severe lower extremity traumatic injuries is the lack of a rigorously developed patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument specific to lower extremity trauma patients. OBJECTIVE: This mixed methods protocol aims to describe phases I and II of the development of a PRO instrument for lower extremity trauma patients, following international PRO development guidelines. METHODS: The phase I study follows an interpretive description approach. Development of the PRO instrument begins with identifying the concepts that are important to patients, after which a preliminary conceptual framework is devised from a systematic literature review and used to generate an interview guide. Patients aged 18 years or above with limb-threatening lower extremity traumatic injuries resulting in reconstruction, amputation, or amputation after failed reconstruction will be recruited. The subjects will participate in semistructured, in-depth qualitative interviews to identify all important concepts of interest. The qualitative interview data will be coded with top-level domains, themes, and subthemes. The codes will then be utilized to refine the conceptual framework and generate preliminary items and a set of scales. The preliminary scales will be further refined via a process of conducting cognitive debriefing interviews with lower extremity trauma patients and soliciting expert opinions. Phase III will include a large-scale field test, using Rasch measurement theory to analyze the psychometric properties of the instrument; shortening and finalizing the scales; and determining the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the instrument. RESULTS: Phases I and II of this study have been funded. Phase I of this study has been completed, and phase II began in January 2019 and is expected to be completed in November 2019. Phase III will begin following the completion of phase II. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol describes the initial phases of development of a novel PRO instrument for use in lower extremity trauma patients. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14397.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207