Quality of Life in Epilepsy: Same questions, but different meaning to different people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used widely to elicit patient's self-appraisal of their health status and quality of life. One fundamental assumption when measuring PROMs is that all individuals interpret questions about their health status in a consistent manner. However, subgroups of patients with a similar health condition may respond differently to PROM questions (ie, differential item functioning [DIF]), leading to biased estimates of group differences on PROM scores. Understanding these differences can help inform the clinical interpretation of PROMs. This study examined whether DIF affects 10-item Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE10) scores reported by patients with epilepsy in outpatient clinics. METHODS: Data were from the Calgary Comprehensive Epilepsy Program, a prospective registry of patients with epilepsy in Calgary, Alberta. Latent variable mixture models (LVMMs) based on standard two-parameter graded response models with increasing numbers of latent classes were applied to QOLIE10 item data. Model fit was assessed using the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) and latent class model entropy. Ordinal logistic regression was used to identify QOLIE10 items that exhibited DIF. RESULTS: In this cohort of 1143 patients, 567 (49.6%) were female and the median age was 37.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 27.0) years. A two-class LVMM, which provided the best fit to the data, identified two subgroups of patients with different response patterns to QOLIE10 items, with class proportions of 0.62 and 0.38. The two subgroups differed with respect to antiseizure polytherapy, reported medication side effects, frequency of seizures, and psychiatric comorbidities. QOLIE10 items on the physical and psychological side effects of medication exhibited large DIF effects. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study revealed two different response patterns to quality-of-life instruments, suggesting heterogeneity in how patients interpret some of the questions. Researchers and users of PROMs in epilepsy need to consider the differential interpretation of items for various instruments to ensure valid understanding and comparisons of PROM scores.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".