MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4327728761 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1031978

Fluctuations of health states in dementia diseases and their impact on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L: Protocol of a mixed-methods study

2023· article· en· W4327728761 on OpenAlexaff
Niklas Weber, Feng Xie, Thomas Kohlmann, Wiebke Mohr, Moritz Platen, Anika Rädke, Ingo Kilimann, Lidia Engel, Bernhard Michalowsky

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersEuroQol Research FoundationDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen
KeywordsRecallHealth assessmentMedicineDementiaInterviewProxy (statistics)EQ-5DCognitive interviewGerontologyPsychologyHealth related quality of lifeCognitionPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The EQ-5D is a widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument. The recall period "today" may miss out on recurrent health fluctuations often observed in people with dementia (PlwD). Thus, this study aims to assess the frequency of health fluctuations, affected HRQoL dimensions and the impact of the health fluctuations on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L. Methods and analysis: This mixed-methods study will base on n=50 patient and caregiver dyads and four main study phases: (1) Baseline assessment of patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics; (2) caregivers self-completion of a daily diary for 14 days, documenting patient's today's health compared to yesterday, the affected HRQoL dimensions, and events that could have caused the fluctuations; (3) administration of the EQ-5D-5L as self- and proxy-rating at baseline, day seven and day 14; (4) interviewing caregivers on patient's health fluctuation, the consideration of past fluctuations in the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L, and the appropriateness of recall periods to capture health fluctuations on day 14. Qualitative semi-structured interview data will be analyzed thematically. Quantitative analyses will be used to describe the frequency and intensity of health fluctuations, affected dimensions, and the association between health fluctuation and its consideration in the assessment of health today. Discussion: This study aims to reveal insights into the health fluctuation in dementia, the affected dimensions, and underlying health events, as well as whether individuals adhere to the recall period of health today using the EQ-5D-5L. This study will also provide information about more appropriate recall periods that could better capture health fluctuations. Trial registration: This study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027956).

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public Health→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→