MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3090630160 · doi:10.2196/20723

Using a Mobile App-Based International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Set to Assess the Functioning of Spinal Cord Injury Patients: Rasch Analysis

2020· article· en· W3090630160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mengmeng Jia, Jie Tang, Sumei Xie, Xiaokuo He, Yingmin Wang, Ting Liu, Tiebin Yan, Kun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsRasch modelInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthDifferential item functioningOperationalizationTerminologyPsychologyRehabilitationApplied psychologySet (abstract data type)Physical medicine and rehabilitationClinical psychologyPhysical therapyMedicinePsychometricsItem response theoryDevelopmental psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) is a unified system of functioning terminology that has been used to develop electronic health records and assessment instruments. Its application has been limited, however, by its complex terminology, numerous categories, uncertain operationalization, and the training required to use it well. Together is a mobile health app designed to extend medical support to the families of spinal cord injury (SCI) patients in China. The app's core framework is a set of only 31 ICF categories. The app also provides rating guidelines and automatically transforms routine assessment results to the terms of the ICF qualifiers. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the research is to examine the suitability of the ICF set used in the app Together for use as an instrument for assessing the functioning of SCI patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted including 112 SCI patients recruited before discharge from four rehabilitation centers in China between May 2018 and October 2019. Nurses used the app to assess patient functioning in face-to-face interviews. The resulting data were then subjected to Rasch analysis. RESULTS: After deleting two categories (family relationships and socializing) and one personal factor (knowledge about spinal cord injury) that did not fit the Rasch model, the body functions and body structures, activities and participation, and contextual factors components of the ICF exhibited adequate fit to the Rasch model. All three demonstrated acceptable person separation indices. The 28 categories retained in the set were free of differential item functioning by gender, age, education level, or etiology. CONCLUSIONS: Together overcomes some of the obstacles to practical application of the ICF. The app is a reliable assessment tool for assessing functioning after spinal cord injury.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.267
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→