Network analysis of multimorbidity and health outcomes among persons with spinal cord injury in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Multimorbidity, defined as the coexistence of two or more health conditions, is common in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI). Network analysis is a powerful tool to visualize and examine the relationship within complex systems. We utilized network analysis to explore the relationship between 30 secondary health conditions (SHCs) and health outcomes in persons with traumatic (TSCI) and non-traumatic SCI (NTSCI). The study objectives were to (1) apply network models to the 2011–2012 Canadian SCI Community Survey dataset to identify key variables linking the SHCs measured by the Multimorbidity Index-30 (MMI-30) to healthcare utilization (HCU), health status, and quality of life (QoL), (2) create a short form of the MMI-30 based on network analysis, and (3) compare the network-derived MMI to the MMI-30 in persons with TSCI and NTSCI. Methods Three network models (Gaussian Graphical, Ising, and Mixed Graphical) were created and analyzed using standard network measures (e.g., network centrality). Data analyzed included demographic and injury variables (e.g., age, sex, region of residence, date, injury severity), multimorbidity (using MMI-30), HCU (using the 7-item HCU questionnaire and classified as “felt needed care was not received” [HCU-FNCNR]), health status (using the 12-item Short Form survey [SF-12] Physical and Mental Component Summary [PCS-12 and MCS-12] score), and QoL (using the 11-item Life Satisfaction questionnaire [LiSAT-11] first question and a single item QoL measure). Results Network analysis of 1,549 participants (TSCI: 1137 and NTSCI: 412) revealed strong connections between the independent nodes (30 SHCs) and the dependent nodes (HCU-FNCNR, PCS-12, MCS-12, LiSAT-11, and the QoL score). Additionally, network models identified that cancer, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, diabetes, high blood pressure, and liver disease were isolated. Logistic regression analysis indicated the network-derived MMI-25 correlated with all health outcome measures (p <0.001) and was comparable to the MMI-30. Discussion The network-derived MMI-25 was comparable to the MMI-30 and was associated with inadequate HCU, lower health status, and poor QoL. The MMI-25 shows promise as a follow-up screening tool to identify persons living with SCI at risk of having poor health outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".