MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402620050 · doi:10.1186/s41687-024-00743-7

The psychometric properties of the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QoL) measurement system in neurorehabilitation populations: a systematic review

2024· review· en· W4402620050 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Patient-Reported Outcomes · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie UniversityMcGill UniversityCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackayCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurorehabilitationQuality of life (healthcare)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineRehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature of existing evidence on the measurement properties of the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QoL) measurement system among neurorehabilitation populations. DATA SOURCES: The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guided this systematic review in which we searched nine electronic databases and registries, and hand-searched reference lists of included articles. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers screened selected articles and extracted data from 28 included studies. DATA EXTRACTION: COSMIN's approach guided extraction and synthesizing measurement properties evidence (insufficient, sufficient), and the modified GRADE approach guided synthesizing evidence quality (very-low, low, moderate, high) by diagnosis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Neuro-QoL has sufficient measurement properties when used by individuals with Huntington's disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, stroke, lupus, cognitive decline, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The strongest evidence is for the first four conditions, where test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness are nearly always sufficient (GRADE: moderate-high). Structural validity is assessed only in multiple sclerosis and stroke but is often insufficient (GRADE: moderate-high). Criterion validity is sufficient in some stroke and Huntington's disease domains (GRADE: high). Item response theory analyses were reported for some stroke domains only. There is limited, mixed evidence for responsiveness and measurement error (GRADE: moderate-high), and no cross-cultural validity evidence CONCLUSIONS: Neuro-QoL domains can describe and evaluate patients with Huntington's disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, and stroke, but predictive validity evidence would be beneficial. In the other conditions captured in this review, a limited number of Neuro-QoL domains have evidence for descriptive use only. For these conditions, further evidence of structural validity, measurement error, cross-cultural validity and predictive validity would enhance the use and interpretation of Neuro-QoL.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.185 · 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