Reliability and Validity of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes Using the Smartphone App AllerSearch for Hay Fever: Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hay fever is a highly prevalent, heterogenous, and multifactorial disease. Patients may benefit from longitudinal assessments using mobile health (mHealth) principles. We have previously attempted to establish an effective mHealth platform for patients with hay fever through AllerSearch, our in-house smartphone app that assesses electronic patient-reported outcomes through a questionnaire on hay fever and provides evidence-based advice. To be used by the public, an investigation on its reliability and validity is necessary. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to assess the reliability and validity of subjective symptom data on hay fever collected through our app, AllerSearch. METHODS: This study used a prospective observational design. The participants were patients aged ≥20 years recruited from a single university hospital between June 2, 2021, and January 26, 2022. We excluded patients who could not use smartphones as well as those with incomplete data records and outlier data. All participants answered the Japanese Allergic Conjunctival Disease Standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (JACQLQ), first in the paper-and-pencil format and subsequently on AllerSearch on the same day. The JACQLQ comprises the following three domains: Domain I, with 9 items on ocular or nasal symptoms; Domain II, with 17 items on daily activity and psychological well-being; and Domain III, with 3 items on overall condition by face score. The concordance rate of each domain between the 2 platforms was calculated. The internal consistency of Domains I and II of the 2 platforms was assessed using Cronbach alpha coefficients, the concurrent validity of Domains I and II was assessed by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients, and the mean differences between the 2 platforms were assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: In total, 22 participants were recruited; the data of 20 (91%) participants were analyzed. The average age was 65.4 (SD 12.8) years, and 80% (16/20) of the participants were women. The concordance rate of Domains I, II, and III between the paper-based and app-based JACQLQ was 0.78, 0.85, and 0.90, respectively. The internal consistency of Domains I and II between the 2 platforms was satisfactory (Cronbach alpha of .964 and .919, respectively). Pearson correlation analysis yielded a significant positive correlation between Domains I and II across the 2 platforms (r=0.920 and r=0.968, respectively). The mean difference in Domains I and II between the 2 platforms was 3.35 units (95% limits of agreement: -6.51 to 13.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that AllerSearch is a valid and reliable tool for the collection of electronic patient-reported outcomes to assess hay fever, contributing to the advantages of the mHealth platform.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".