MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391847688 · doi:10.2147/prom.s441583

Cross-Sectional Quantitative Evaluation of a Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure in Familial Chylomicronemia Syndrome

2024· article· en· W4391847688 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. Michelle Brown, Montserrat Vera‐Llonch, Chisom Kanu, Asia Sikora Kessler, Aaron Yarlas, Sheri Fehnel

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Related Outcome Measures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipid metabolism and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIonis Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyCross-sectional studyPatient-reported outcomeConstruct validityRecallDemographicsScale (ratio)Clinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychometricsQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineDemographyPathologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS) is a rare metabolic disorder that impacts physical, emotional, social, and cognitive functioning. The FCS-Symptom and Impact Scale (FCS-SIS) patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure assesses common symptoms and impacts of FCS. This study was conducted to evaluate cross-sectional psychometric properties of the FCS-SIS and its scoring method. Methods: This multisite, cross-sectional, observational study of individuals with FCS was conducted in the United States and Canada. Participants completed a survey composed of 7 PRO measures, including the FCS-SIS, and questions about clinical characteristics and demographics. The structure of the FCS-SIS was evaluated using inter-item and item-scale correlations and internal consistency reliability. Construct, known-groups, and criterion validity were evaluated by examining associations between FCS-SIS item and composite scores and other measures included within the survey. Results: Most of the 33 participants were female (63.6%) and White (78.1%). On average, participants reported first noticing FCS symptoms at ~16 years, with abdominal pain the most frequently reported initial symptom (n=20). Participants reported 2.5 acute pancreatitis attacks on average over the past year. Average FCS-SIS symptom item scores ranged from 1.8 to 3.9 (on a 0-to-10 scale [none-to-worst-possible]) within the 24-hour recall period, with an average Symptom composite score of 2.7. The average impact item scores on the FCS-SIS ranged from 1.6 to 3.0 (on a 0-to-4 scale), with an average Impact composite score of 2.1. Inter-item correlations between the FCS-SIS Symptom items ranged from 0.32 to 0.78. Corrected item-total correlations were highly satisfactory for Impact items, ranging from 0.62 to 0.85. All a priori validity hypotheses were supported by observed correlations and score differences between known groups. Conclusion: The results of this study support the structure, reliability, and validity of the FCS-SIS, laying the psychometric groundwork for longitudinal evaluation of its utility in assessing treatment benefit in FCS clinical studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Related Outcome MeasuresSame topicLipid metabolism and disordersFrench-language works237,207