MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390079158 · doi:10.1017/s1355617723002709

67 Extending Evidence of Validity for Symptom Severity Classification of the PostConcussion Symptom Inventory (PCSI)

2023· article· en· W4390079158 on OpenAlexaff
Dean R Allen, Roger Zemek, Gérard A. Gioia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConcussionPhysical therapyPoison controlInjury preventionEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: External validation of symptom severity classification levels for the PostConcussion Symptom Inventory (PCSI). Participants and Methods: Two distinct samples of parents and children, ages 8-18, participated from a: (1) prospective multicenter cohort study (Predicting Persistent Post-concussive Problems in Pediatrics, 5P) (Zemek et al., 2016), including parents (n=2,852), adolescents (n=1,087; mean age=15.13; 54% male), and children (n=1,271; mean age=10.70; 65% male) and (2) published clinic sample at Children’s National Hospital (CN) including parents (n=1,197; adolescents, n=835; children, n=326) (Gioia et al., 2019). Participants completed the age-specific Post-Concussion Symptom Inventory (PCSI): Mean time postinjury = 8 hours (5P), 6 days (PCSI2), generating a post-pre-injury difference (RAPID) score. The distribution of the RAPID scores for the Total Symptom and 4 subscales (physical, emotional, cognitive, sleep/fatigue) were examined to define 4 symptom severity classification levels (minimal - within the CI for recovered, low <20th %tile, moderate 21-79th %tile, high >80th %tile) for the respective samples. These severity distributions were compared between the two distinct datasets. Results: ANOVAs were performed to examine group differences in the mean scores for each of the 4 classification levels. No significant differences were found for all the RAPID score distributions with minimal effect sizes (<.1% variance) for the parents, adolescents and children. PCSI RAPID Total Score ranges for the severity classifications were as follows: Minimal-Parent and adolescent groups 5P<=5, Clinic <=5; Children: 5P<=3, Clinic<=3; Low- Parents 5P 6-15, Clinic 6-13; Adolescents 5P 6-19, Clinic 6-16; Children: 5P 4-7, Clinic: 4-7; Moderate-Parents 5P 16-49, Clinic 14-47; Adolescents 5P 20-56, Clinic 17-51; Children 5P 8-17, Clinic: 818; High- Parents: 5P>=50, Clinic >=48; Adolescents 5P >=57, Clinic >=52; Children 5P >=18, Clinic >=19). Conclusions: Our findings reveal a parallel distribution of RAPID scores in the two distinct 5P and Clinic patient populations, yielding nearly identical severity classification level parameters across all five PCSI symptom domains (total score, physical, cognitive, emotional, and sleep/fatigue). The present investigation provides evidence of validity for the use of these severity classification levels across the ED and specialty clinic settings.

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)0.050
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.165 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Neuropsychological SocietySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207