P.052 Utility of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale (ALSFRS) bulbar subscores for predicting need for gastrostomy tube
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We evaluated the utility of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS) in predicting risk of gastrostomy tube (G-tube) insertion in patients with ALS. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials Database. People with ALS, at least two ALSFRS scores, and baseline swallowing subscore >1 were included. G-tube outcome was defined as reaching a swallowing subscore ≤1. Predictors were ALSFRS bulbar subscores (swallowing, speech, salivation). Survival analyses estimated median time to outcome and cumulative probability of outcome within 91 days. Individuals were censored at last ALSFRS score. Results: We included 6,943 participants. Median [95% CI] time to G-tube insertion was 245 [228, 285], 562 [547, 621], and 1,268 [980, 1,926] for baseline swallowing subscores of 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Probability of G-tube insertion was associated with baseline swallowing, speech, and salivation subscores (log-rank test p < 0.0001). For patients who transitioned to a swallowing subscore of 2 or 3, 18.1% [95% CI 16.1, 20.3] and 1.9% [95% CI 1.3, 2.7] required G-tube insertion within 91 days of score transition. Conclusions: ALSFRS bulbar subscores may identify patients at risk of G-tube insertion. Probability of G-tube insertion within 91 days is low if swallowing subscore ≥3.
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".