Validation of a Modified Version of the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score
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: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) suffer from chronic and progressive symptom burden. MPN trials capturing patient-reported symptoms routinely administer the MPN Symptom Assessment Form (SAF). The MPN-10 assesses 10 of the most clinically relevant symptoms, including fatigue and generates a Total Symptom Score (TSS). The original MPN-10 included a fatigue item from the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI). The myelofibrosis-specific symptom assessment tool called the MFSAF v4 utilizes a fatigue item developed to be consistent with other items within the SAF. This study sought to validate a modified version of the MPN-10 TSS using the SAF fatigue item for harmonization with MFSAF v4. METHODS: Survey data from two cohorts of patients with essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, or myelofibrosis assessing MPN characteristics and symptom burden were used. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: BFI and SAF fatigue items were highly correlated in raw score (Pearson r = 0.88), comparable in their severity categorizations (89% agreement for severe versus non-severe) and respective contributions to the TSS (both Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Reliability of SAF fatigue was acceptable and independently associated with known disease-related characteristics (splenomegaly, low quality-of-life, and distress). Fatigue in patients with MPNs is measured with high similarity using the SAF fatigue item within the MPN-10 in harmonization with the MFSAF v4.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it