MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004695540 · doi:10.1111/bjd.18922

Development of a new patient‐reported outcome measure to assess activities and participation in people with systemic sclerosis: the Cochin 17‐item Scleroderma Functional scale

2020· article· en· W3004695540 on OpenAlexaff
Camille Daste, Hendy Abdoul, Frantz Foissac, Agathe Papelard, Sophie Alami, Linda Kwakkenbos, Marie‐Eve Carrier, Marie‐Martine Lefèvre‐Colau, Brett D. Thombs, Serge Poiraudeau, François Rannou, Luc Mouthon, Christelle Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScleroderma (fungus)Patient-reported outcomeScale (ratio)Systemic sclerodermaMeasure (data warehouse)Outcome (game theory)MedicineMultiple sclerosisPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicinePsychiatryComputer scienceGeographyPathologyCartographyData miningNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) aimed at assessing people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) have rarely involved the target population in the item- and domain-generation stage of the instrument construction. OBJECTIVES: To develop a new PROM assessing activities and participation in people with SSc. METHODS: A provisional International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based 65-item questionnaire previously developed from interviews of people with SSc was sent by email to all patients followed in the internal medicine department of Cochin hospital (n = 184) and enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort. Items were reduced according to their metric properties. Dimensional structure of the questionnaire was assessed by principal component analysis, convergent and divergent validities by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, internal consistency by Cronbach's α, and reliability by a test-retest method using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 113 of 184 patients (61·4%) completed the provisional questionnaire. The item-reduction process resulted in a 17-item questionnaire, the Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional scale (CSF-17). Principal component analysis extracted two dimensions: 10 items related to mobility (CSF-17 section A) and seven items related to general tasks (CSF-17 section B). We observed convergent validity of the CSF-17 total score with global activity limitation, pain, depression and aesthetic burden, and divergent validity with anxiety. Cronbach's α was 0·94 for section A and 0·95 for section B. ICC (n = 25 patients) was 0·92 for the CSF-17 total score. Bland-Altman analysis did not reveal a systematic trend for the test-retest. CONCLUSIONS: The CSF-17 is a new PROM assessing activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Its content and construct validities are very high. What is already known about this topic? In the earliest stages of construction patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) for people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) rarely involve the target population. Instruments able to capture the specific needs of people with SSc in terms of activities and participation are lacking. What does this study add? The Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional Scale (CSF-17) is a new PROM assessing global activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Patients' perspectives were prioritized at all stages of construction. What are the clinical implications of this work? The CSF-17 could be used in clinical practice and research to assess the efficacy of complex multidisciplinary interventions targeting activity limitations and participation restriction in people with SSc. Linked Comment: Clark and Denton. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:610.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207