MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluating Implementation of Health-related Quality of Life Measures for Patients With Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia Supports Development of a Latin American Spanish Questionnaire

2025· article· en· W4410275931 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert J Reklow, Jane S. Lucas, Margaret W. Leigh, Alexandra L. Quittner, Sharon Dell

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary ciliary dyskinesiaMedicineLatin AmericansQuality of life (healthcare)DyskinesiaFamily medicineNursingPathologyDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale: Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a life-shortening, genetic disorder affecting 1 in 7500 individuals. PCD inhibits motile cilia activity and impacts the respiratory, auditory, olfactory and reproductive systems. Methods that measure the impact of PCD historically have lacked sensitivity to disease progression and failed to account for changes in a patient's daily physical, respiratory or social functioning. Between 2015 and 2017, quality of life questionnaires (QOL-PCD) for adults (18+), adolescents (13-17) or children with caregiver proxy (6-12) were created to comprehensively assess patient-reported outcomes. In 2023, the BEAT-PCD consensus statement recommended using validated QOL-PCD instruments as a core outcome for clinical trials. Our goal was to evaluate current implementation of the QOL-PCD. Methods: Implementation was assessed using data extracted from completed QOL-PCD requests captured in a REDCap database hosted at BC Children's Hospital in Vancouver, BC. Results: 81% of requests for the QOL-PCD have been successfully fulfilled (47/58). On average, there were 6 QOL-PCD requests per year between 2018 and 2023, however requests increased 136% in 2024. The QOL-PCD is largely accessed for research purposes (74%) rather than clinical monitoring (21%). 62% of completed requests originated from academic institutions. 79% specifically use adult questionnaires, compared to adolescent (66%) and child questionnaires (62%). Approximately 2500 individuals worldwide have/will be assessed using the QOL-PCD, including 1339 adults, 586 teenagers and 594 children. On average, 43 adults, 29 adolescents or 27 children are assessed by each age-specific version request. The QOL-PCD has been distributed most to the USA (10), Germany (5) and Turkey (5), although the QOL has been utilized on every continent. Of 15 available languages, the most common are English (55%) and German (21%). Latin American Spanish is the third most requested language, however there is no validated translated QOL-PCD (Figure 1). Finally, slightly more than half of QOL users (53%) agreed to share anonymous data obtained using the questionnaires, compared to 21% who do not agree. Conclusion: QOL-PCD comprehensively assesses the impact of PCD throughout the lifespan and its use has increased sharply in the past year, likely due to published consensus statements. Questionnaires are largely used for academic research studies, particularly in North America and Europe. Future validated translations of the QOL-PCD, such as Latin American Spanish, may further improve utilization, particularly in the Global South. Outreach to increase access of data captured by QOL users will also facilitate future development of this important tool.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→