The added value of the cognition, dining, gastrointestinal problems, sleep and tiredness bolt-on dimensions to the EQ-5D-5L in patients with coeliac disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Multiple studies suggest that the EQ-5D may overestimate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with coeliac disease (CD). We aimed to develop and psychometrically test potentially relevant bolt-on dimensions to improve the measurement performance of the EQ-5D-5L in CD patients. METHODS: The development and selection of bolt-ons were informed by a literature review on HRQoL in CD, expert and patient input. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted amongst 312 adult CD patients. Respondents completed the EQ-5D-5L, two condition-specific bolt-ons newly-developed for the present study [dining (DI) and gastrointestinal problems (GI)] and three existing bolt-ons [cognition (CO), sleep (SL) and tiredness (TI)]. The following psychometric properties were tested: ceiling, informativity, convergent and known-group validity, and dimensionality (confirmatory factor analysis). RESULTS: =0.71) and improved the discriminatory power for all known-groups. GI was the only bolt-on loading on a different factor from the five core dimensions, whereas the other four bolt-ons loaded onto the same 'psychosocial health' factor as the EQ-5D-5L anxiety/depression dimension. CONCLUSION: The DI, GI, SL and TI bolt-ons, especially the GI, enhance the validity of EQ-5D-5L in patients with CD, suggesting their value in capturing important HRQoL aspects potentially missed by the five core dimensions. These bolt-ons can be used in sensitivity analyses supporting health technology assessments and subsequent resource allocation decisions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".