Lack of correlation of the health assessment questionnaire disability index with lung parameters in systemic sclerosis associated pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) affects the quality of life (QoL) and the ability to perform the activities of daily living (ADLs) in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). We determined whether the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), a self-assessment measure of function, correlates with a patient's PAH status in a population of SSc patients with PAH. METHODS: Forty-one patients from one centre with systemic scleroderma, dyspnea and PAH were included. All patients filled in a HAQ-DI, and underwent evaluation with pulmonary function tests (PFTs), 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), degree of dyspnea (Borg dyspnea index), NYHA functional class, and expert PAH physician global assessment every 6 months. Change in HAQ DI was studied to determine relationship to changes in PAH. RESULTS: The HAQ-DI scores had no significant correlation with PAH, including NYHA functional class (r=0.38, p=0.39), Borg dyspnea index (r=0.60, p=0.37), 6MWD (r=-0.04, p=0.86), % predicted DLCO (r=0.31, p=0.25), % predicted FVC (r=0.02, p=0.93), and expert PAH physician global assessment (r=0.06, p=0.97). CONCLUSION: HAQ-DI is not an adequate measure of PAH status in SSc patients with PAH. Although PAH causes severe morbidity and death, changes in PAH severity were not reflected in an overall functional status change as assessed by the HAQ-DI. Thus, HAQ-DI changes do not reflect PAH status in SSc.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".