MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327899793 · doi:10.1002/acr.25115

Evaluation of Measurement Properties and Differential Item Functioning in the English and French Versions of the University of California, Los Angeles, Loneliness Scale‐6: A Scleroderma <scp>Patient‐Centered</scp> Intervention Network (<scp>SPIN</scp>) Study

2023· article· en· W4327899793 on OpenAlexafffund
Chelsea S. Rapoport, Alyssa K. Choi, Linda Kwakkenbos, Marie‐Eve Carrier, Richard S. Henry, Luc Mouthon, Scott C. Roesch, Brett D. Thombs, Vanessa L. Malcarne

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersLady Davis Institute for Medical ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchScleroderma AtlanticScleroderma Association of British ColumbiaScleroderma VictoriaScleroderma Society of OntarioJewish General HospitalArthritis SocietyFondation de l'Hôpital général juifMcGill University
KeywordsDifferential item functioningLonelinessConvergent validityClinical psychologyConfirmatory factor analysisPsychologyMeasurement invariancePsychometricsItem response theoryMedicineGerontologyStructural equation modelingStatisticsPsychiatryInternal consistencyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Loneliness has been associated with poorer health‐related quality of life but has not been studied in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). The current study was undertaken to examine and compare the psychometric properties of the English and French versions of the University of California, Los Angeles, Loneliness Scale‐6 (ULS‐6) in patients with SSc during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods This study used baseline cross‐sectional data from 775 adults enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient‐Centered Intervention Network (SPIN) COVID‐19 Cohort. Reliability and validity of ULS‐6 scores overall and between languages were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), differential item functioning (DIF) through the multiple‐indicator multiple‐cause (MIMIC) model, omega/alpha calculation, and correlations of hypothesized convergent relationships. Results CFA for the total sample supported the single‐factor structure (comparative fit index [CFI] 0.96, standardized root mean residual [SRMR] 0.03), and all standardized factor loadings for items were large (0.60–0.86). The overall MIMIC model with language as a covariate fit well (CFI 0.94, SRMR 0.04, root mean square error of approximation 0.11). Statistically significant DIF was found for 3 items across language (βitem2 = 0.14, P < 0.001; βitem4 = –0.07, P = 0.01; βitem6 = 0.13, P < 0.001), but these small differences were without practical measurement implications. Analyses demonstrated high internal consistency with no language‐based convergent validity differences. Conclusion Analyses demonstrated evidence of acceptable reliability and validity of ULS‐6 scores in English‐ and French‐speaking adults with SSc. DIF analysis supported use of the ULS‐6 to examine comparative experiences of loneliness without adjusting for language.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.168 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207