Psychometric properties and use of the DEMQOL suite of instruments in research: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Dementia is a public health issue and a major risk factor for poor quality of life among older adults. In the absence of a cure, enhancing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people with dementia is the primary goal of care. Robust measurement of HRQoL is a prerequisite to effective improvement. The DEMQOL suite of instruments is considered among the best available to measure HRQoL in people with dementia; however, no review has systematically and comprehensively examined the use of the DEMQOL in research and summarised evidence to determine its feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness for use in research and practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search 12 electronic databases and reference lists of all included studies. We will include systematically conducted reviews, as well as, quantitative and qualitative research studies that report on the development, validation or use in research studies of any of the DEMQOL instruments. Two reviewers will independently screen all studies for eligibility, and assess the quality of each included study using one of four validated checklists appropriate for different study designs. Discrepancies at all stages of the review will be resolved by consensus. We will use descriptive statistics (frequencies, proportions, ranges), content analysis of narrative data and vote counting (for the measures of association) to summarise the data elements. Using narrative synthesis, we will summarise what is known about the development, validation, feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness and use of the DEMQOL. Our review methods will follow the reporting and conduct guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this project does not involve primary data collection. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020157851.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.148 | 0.162 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.076 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".