Factor analysis identifies three separate symptom clusters in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a severe and progressive lung disease with a poor prognosis. Patients with IPF suffer from a high symptom burden, which impairs their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Lack of research on IPF symptoms and their clustering, however, makes symptom-centred care challenging. Methods We sent two questionnaires, RAND 36-Item Health Survey and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, to 300 patients from the FinnishIPF registry. Of the 300 patients, 245 (82%) responded. We performed an exploratory factor analysis on the results to search for potential clustering of symptoms into factors. Results We found three distinct symptom factors: the emotional factor (including depression, anxiety, insomnia, loss of appetite and nausea), the pain factor (pain at rest or in movement) and the respiratory symptoms factor (shortness of breath, cough, tiredness and loss of wellbeing). Correlation was strong within the factors (ρ τ 0.78–0.85) and also evident between them. The factors correlated with the different dimensions of HRQoL: the emotional factor with mental health (correlation coefficient=−0.69) and vitality (−0.63), the pain factor with bodily pain (−0.72) and the respiratory symptoms factor with vitality (−0.69), general health (−0.64) and physical functioning (−0.62). Conclusion We found three distinct symptom factors in IPF, of which respiratory and emotional factors showed the strongest association with decreasing HRQoL. Routine assessment of IPF patients' respiratory symptoms, mental health and pain are important as these may be linked with other symptoms and significantly impair the patient's HRQoL.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it