MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410990097 · doi:10.2147/por.s508814

Mapping EQ-5D-5L Score From SGRQ in Patients with Asthma and/or COPD in NOVELTY

2025· article· en· W4410990097 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Jackson, Anna Quinton, Fanni Zhang, Hana Müllerová, Christer Janson, Mohsen Sadatsafavi

Bibliographic record

VenuePragmatic and Observational Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsNoveltyAsthmaCOPDPhysical therapyMedicineInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) measures health status in obstructive airways disease. Starkie et al proposed an algorithm for mapping the SGRQ to EQ-5D-5L, a preference-based utility measure, in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (Value Health 2011;14:354-60); only SGRQ total score, its squared value, and sex were included as covariates. We aimed to determine if including additional covariates could improve the performance of this algorithm type and whether amendments were required to extend this mapping to asthma or asthma+COPD. Patients and Methods: SGRQ and EQ-5D-5L were measured from a large, global, prospective, longitudinal study in asthma and/or COPD (NOVELTY; NCT02760329). We fitted six longitudinal linear mixed models to the development sample (baseline and Year 1 data), with EQ-5D-5L as the response variable. Each model had a different combination of covariates. Mixed model repeated measures methodology was used to enable the accommodation of within-patient correlation among measurements. Restricted maximum likelihood and an unstructured covariance matrix were used to fit all models. Performance (mean square errors [MSE]) was evaluated relative to the Starkie et al algorithm in the validation sample (Year 2 and Year 3 data). Results: A total of 6813 patients (asthma: 3546; asthma+COPD: 872; COPD: 2395) with available EQ-5D-5L and SGRQ data were included at baseline. MSEs indicated good performance, were similar across models (Year 2: 0.0302-0.0308 [45-46% variance explained]; Year 3: 0.0272-0.0277 [47-48% variance explained]), and were modestly smaller than those obtained by Starkie et al (Year 2: 0.0340; Year 3: 0.0296). Performance was similar across models in the asthma and COPD subgroups. Conclusion: Including additional covariates and SGRQ domains resulted in similar model performance to Starkie et al, suggesting their covariates are adequate for mapping in asthma and/or COPD. NOVELTY coefficients broaden the population with chronic airways disease for whom this mapping can be applied.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.536
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.079 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePragmatic and Observational ResearchSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207