MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014675719 · doi:10.1055/s-0039-3403248

determinants of health-related quality of life deterioration in interstitial lung disease patients

2020· article· en· W3014675719 on OpenAlexaff
Phillen Maqhuzu, Boglárka Szentes, Michael Kreuter, Thomas Bahmer, Martin Claussen, Larissa Schwarzkopf

Bibliographic record

VenuePneumologie · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterstitial lung diseaseMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)DiseaseHealth related quality of lifeLungLung diseaseIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) is known to be poor, however, predictors for HRQL decline over time are sparsely investigated. We aimed to identify predictors for HRQL decline in ILD-patients within a 12-month observation period. Methods: We used longitudinal data of 194 ILD patients recruited at two large German ILD centers in the observational HILDA study. We used the generic HRQL measure, EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the disease-specific Kingʼs Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire (KBILD) with the subdomains ‘psychological impact’, ‘chest symptomsʼ and ’breathlessness and activitiesʼ. Scores for both measures range between zero (worst HRQL) and 100 (best HRQL). We used the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) of VAS (6.9) and K-BILD (8) to analyze the proportion of patients who experienced a clinically meaningful decline in HRQL. Subsequently we investigated sociodemographic factors, lung function, baseline HRQL and medical history, as potential predictors of HRQL deterioration. Results: Within the study population (34.0% male, Ø age 61.7) mean HRQL scores hardly changed between baseline and 12-months follow up (K-BILD: 52.8 vs. 52.5 | VAS: 60.0 vs. 57.3). On the intra-individual level according to prespecified MCIDs, 35.1% of patients experienced a clinically relevant deterioration in ‘breathlessness and activitiesʼ, 30.7% in ’chest symptomsʼ, 28.4% in ‘psychological impact’, 29.9% in KBILD total score and 29.4% in VAS. Baseline DLCO% pred. was associated with deterioration in ‘breathlessness and activitiesʼ (β-coef.-0.04, p = 0.003) and ’chest symptomsʼ (β-coef. − 0.04, p = 0.002) and baseline FVC% pred. with deterioration in ‘psychological impact’ (β-coef. − 0.02, p = 0.021), KBILD total score (β-coef. − 0.02, p = 0.007) and VAS (β-coef. − 0.04, p < 0.0001). On the contrary, increasing age positively influenced ‘psychological impact’ (β-coef. 0.06, p < 0,0001). Other factors had no significant impact. Conclusion: Around a third of ILD patients experienced a clinically relevant HRQL deterioration in a 12-months period, which is mainly predicted by lung function baseline value. Thus, measures of lung function are important clinical assessment tools to predict the consequences of the disease for everyday life.

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)0.005
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePneumologieSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207