Validity and reliability of the University of California and Los Angeles Loneliness Scale in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND The psychometric properties of loneliness measures have not been reported in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the University of California and Los Angeles Loneliness Scale (UCLA-LS) version 3 for use in this population.METHODS The UCLA-LS was administered at baseline and again after 1 to 2 weeks for test-retest reliability assessment. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was used to assess reliability and estimate minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity was established by assessing known groups, and convergent and divergent validity.RESULTS Of the 47 individuals included in this study, 40 persons (87%) reported moderate to high loneliness levels. The UCLA-LS discriminated (p < 0.03) between groups based on marital status, with higher loneliness levels for single (mean difference [MD] = 8 points) and widowed (MD = 7 points) compared to married individuals. The scale had moderate to strong associations with measures of depression (ρ = 0.69-0.72; p < 0.001), anxiety (ρ = 0.46-0.52; p < 0.03), and quality of life (Chronic respiratory questionnaire [CRQ]-Fatigue: ρ = −0.51-−0.53; CRQ-Emotional function: ρ = −0.59-−0.57; CRQ-Mastery: ρ = −0.43-−0.46; p < 0.003). The UCLA-LS showed excellent test-retest reliability with ICC values of 0.96. To detect a change in version 3 UCLA-LS, the MDC score should equal or exceed 7.8 points.CONCLUSION UCLA-LS demonstrated excellent known groups, convergent and divergent validity, and test-retest reliability. These findings may help improve the interpretability of loneliness levels in individuals with COPD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".