Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) among women living with HIV in the United Kingdom: A self-reported repeated measure study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disability is increasingly experienced by women ageing with HIV and multimorbidity. The Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) measures the presence, severity, and episodic nature of disability across six domains. We evaluated EDQ properties among women living with HIV in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Participants in the Positive Transitions Through the Menopause (PRIME) study completed the EDQ at two timepoints (1 week apart), criterion measures (WHODAS 2.0, EQ-5D-5L, Work and Social Adjustment Scale), and a demographic questionnaire. We evaluated internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement precision (Minimum Detectable Change (MDC) 95%), and construct validity. We assessed disability prevalence using WHODAS 2.0 (moderate threshold) and Equality Act Disability Definition (severe threshold). RESULTS: Of 104 participants (median age 56 years, 65% Black ethnicity), 93 (89%) completed the EDQ twice. Median duration since HIV diagnosis was 23 years; 98% had undetectable viral loads and 86% reported multimorbidity. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.83 (social domain) to 0.92 (daily activities domain). ICC ranged from 0.70 (physical domain) to 0.91 (daily activities domain). Precision varied, highest in daily activities (MDC95%: 6.10) and lowest in mental-emotional domains (MDC95%: 11.52). The EDQ met 80% (n = 47/59) of construct validity hypotheses. Disability prevalence was 79.81% (95%CI 70.57, 86.79) moderate and 41.75% (32.24, 51.88) severe. CONCLUSIONS: The EDQ possesses internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity with varied precision among women living with HIV. Disability prevalence in this sample was higher than in the general population. The EDQ offers value for research, clinical practice, and national policy by enabling measurement and description of disability, supporting intervention evaluation, and informing priority-setting and healthcare service planning for women living with HIV in the UK.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".