MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392850151 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000002675

Do Caregivers and Patients With Early-Onset Scoliosis Share the Same Perspective on Health-Related Quality of Life? A Comparison of 24-item Early-Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire and 22-item Scoliosis Research Society Questionnaire Scores

2024· article· en· W4392850151 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel Gottlieb, John T. Smith, Firoz Miyanji, Juan Carlos Rodriguez-Olaverri, Ron El‐Hawary, Ying Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie UniversityBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisPerspective (graphical)Quality of life (healthcare)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyIdiopathic scoliosisHealth related quality of lifePsychiatryNursingComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The 24-item Early-Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire (EOSQ-24) is validated in patients with early onset scoliosis (EOS) aged 0 to 18 years and the 22-item Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) questionnaire is validated in idiopathic scoliosis patients 10 years and older. EOSQ-24 is completed by the caregiver and SRS-22 is completed by the patient. A prior study comparing patient-reported outcome measures completed by older pediatric patients and their parents showed a low level of agreement. Our purpose was to compare EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 scores completed at the same time point and at subsequent time points, in patients aged 5 to 18 years with idiopathic or congenital EOS without developmental delay. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective study. We identified pairs of EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 completed on the same day or within 6 months. Some patients had multiple pairs of surveys over time. EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 questions were matched and domain scores for Pain, Function, Mental Health, and Satisfaction were compared. Patients with a change in treatment between surveys were excluded. Pearson correlation coefficients ( r ) were used to compare domain scores, with r ≥0.7 indicating a strong relationship. RESULTS: There were 228 patient-caregiver dyads who completed 411 pairs of EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 on the same day. A strong correlation was found only for the Pain domain ( r =0.77). Function, Mental Health, and Satisfaction domains had positive but not strong correlations ( r = 0.58, r = 0.50, r = 0.41, respectively). Subanalysis based on age also showed a strong correlation only for Pain. There were 76 patient-caregiver dyads who completed 134 pairs of surveys with SRS-22 completed within 6 months after an EOSQ-24. All domains demonstrated a positive but not strong correlation, with Pain showing the highest correlation ( r = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 had a strong correlation only for Pain when completed at the same time point. EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 completed within 6 months lacked a strong correlation for all domains. Our findings suggest that parents and children with EOS may not share the same perspective on their health. Self-reported questionnaires should be used when possible to assess health-related quality of life in older children and adolescents with EOS who are developmentally neurotypical. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-diagnostic.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207