MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321645981

VALIDATION OF THE ROMANIAN VERSION OF THE ” CALGARY SLEEP APNEA QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX (SAQLI)”

2022· article· en· W4321645981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ojla Tanellari, Alice Murariu, Sorana Roșu, Carmen Savin, Cristian Romanec, Adina Oana Armencia, Carina Balcoș, Clara Diana Haddad, Irina Zetu

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTurkish Urban and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanianIndex (typography)Quality of life (healthcare)Sleep apneaMedicinePsychologyGerontologyComputer scienceInternal medicineNursingWorld Wide WebPhilosophyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: The aim of the present study was to validate the Romanian version of the SAQLI, which is a health-related quality of life questionnaire specific for OSA patients. Material and methods: All patients completed the following questionnaires: Romanian version of SAQLI, Epworth and FOSQ scale. The psychometric properties (internal consistency, construct validity, repeatability) of the SAQLI wich consist in four domains: daily function, social interactions, emotional function and symptoms. Results: 30 patients were included for study (mean age: 62 ±10, with an Epworth scale of 10±2, mean of FOSQ was 79 ±12). Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha between 0.72 to 0.89) and validity for Epworth scale and FOSQ were appropriate. Conclusions: The Romanian version of the SAQLI is a valid quality of life measurement with appropriate psychometric properties for use in patients with OSA.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicTurkish Urban and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207