Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia: a Validation Study of the EQ-5D-3L
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has developed into a crucial outcome parameter in clinical research, evidence of the EQ-5D-3L validation performance is lacking in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) types 1, 2, 3, and 6. The objective of this study is to assess the acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L. For n = 842 predominantly European SCA patients of two longitudinal cohort studies, the EQ-5D-3L, PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire), and ataxia-specific clinical assessments (SARA: Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia; ADL: activities of daily living as part of Friedreich’s Ataxia Rating Scale; INAS: Inventory of Non-Ataxia Signs) were assessed at baseline and multiple annual follow-ups. The EQ-5D-3L was evaluated regarding acceptability, distribution properties, convergent and known-groups validity, test-retest reliability, and effect size measures to analyze health changes. The non-item response was low (EQ-5D-3L index: 0.8%; EQ-VAS: 3.4%). Ceiling effects occurred in 9.9% (EQ-5D-3L) and 3.0% (EQ-VAS) with a mean EQ-5D-3L index of 0.65 ± 0.21. In total, convergent validity showed moderate to strong Spearman’s rho (rs > 0.3) coefficients comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-VAS with PHQ-9, SARA, ADL, and INAS. EQ-5D-3L could discriminate between groups of age, SARA, ADL, and INAS. Intra-class correlation coefficients (EQ-5D-3LICC: 0.95/EQ-VASICC: 0.88) and Kappa statistics (range 0.44 to 0.93 for EQ-5D-3L items) indicated tolerable reliability. EQ-5D-3L shows small (effect size < 0.3) to moderate (effect size 0.3–0.59) health changes regarding ataxia severity. The analysis confirms an acceptable, reliable, valid, and responsive recommended EQ-5D-3L in SCA patients, measuring the HRQoL adequately, besides well-established clinical instruments.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".