Advanced psychometric testing on a clinical screening tool to evaluate insomnia: sleep condition indicator in patients with advanced cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose To examine the psychometric properties of the Sleep Condition Indicator (SCI) using different psychometric approaches [including classical test theory, Rasch models, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve] among patients with advanced cancer. Methods Through convenience sampling, patients with cancer at stage III or IV ( n = 859; 511 males; mean ± SD age = 67.4 ± 7.5 years) were recruited from several oncology units of university hospitals in Iran. All the participants completed the SCI, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). In addition, 491 participants wore an actigraph device to capture objective sleep. Results Classical test theory [factor loadings from confirmatory factor analysis = 0.76–0.89; test–retest reliability = 0.80–0.93] and Rasch analysis [infit mean square (MnSq) = 0.63–1.31; outfit MnSq = 0.61–1.23] both support the construct validity of the SCI. The SCI had significant associations with ISI, PSQI, ESS, HADS, GHQ, and ESAS. In addition, the SCI has satisfactory area under ROC curve (0.92) when comparing a gold standard of insomnia diagnosis. Significant differences in the actigraphy measure were found between insomniacs and non-insomniacs based on the SCI score defined by ROC. Conclusion With the promising psychometric properties shown in the SCI, healthcare providers can use this simple assessment tool to target the patients with advanced cancer who are at risk of insomnia and subsequently provide personalized care efficiently.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".