MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221110594 · doi:10.1186/s40814-022-01005-3

The Sickle Cell Disease Functional Assessment (SCD-FA) tool: a feasibility pilot study

2022· article· en· W4221110594 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charity I Oyedeji, Katherine S. Hall, Alison Luciano, Miriam C. Morey, John J. Strouse

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesAmerican Society of Hematology
KeywordsDiseaseMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The life expectancy for individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) has greatly increased over the last 50 years. Adults with SCD experience multiple complications such as cardiopulmonary disease, strokes, and avascular necrosis that lead to limitations that geriatric populations often experience. There are no dedicated instruments to measure functional decline and functional age to determine risk of future adverse outcomes in older adults with SCD. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of performing the Sickle Cell Disease Functional Assessment (SCD-FA). METHODS: We enrolled 40 adults with SCD (20 younger adults aged 18-49 years as a comparison group and 20 older adults aged 50 years and older) in a single-center prospective cohort study. Participants were recruited from a comprehensive sickle cell clinic in an academic center in the southeastern United States. We included measures validated in an oncology geriatric assessment enriched with additional physical performance measures: usual gait speed, seated grip strength, Timed Up and Go, six-minute walk test, and 30-second chair stand. We also included an additional cognitive measure, which was the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and additional patient-reported measures at the intersection of sickle cell disease and geriatrics. The primary outcome was the proportion completing the assessment. Secondary outcomes were the proportion consenting, duration of the assessment, acceptability, and adverse events. RESULTS: Eighty percent (44/55) of individuals approached consented, 91% (40/44) completed the SCD-FA in its entirety, and the median duration was 89 min (IQR 80-98). There were no identified adverse events. On the acceptability survey, 95% (38/40) reported the length as appropriate, 2.5% (1/40) reported a question as upsetting, and 5% (2/40) reported portions as difficult. Exploratory analyses of physical function showed 63% (25/40) had a slow usual gait speed (< 1.2 m/s). CONCLUSION: The SCD-FA is feasible, acceptable, and safe and physical performance tests identified functional impairments in adults with SCD. These findings will inform the next phase of the study where we will assess the validity of the SCD-FA to predict patient-important outcomes in a larger sample of adults with SCD.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207