MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7033248132

Practicality, validity and responsiveness of using the proxy version of the CHU-9D with children aged 2 to 5 years

2024· article· en· W7033248132 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsSt. George's, University of LondonKing's College LondonImperial College LondonUniversity of SouthamptonUniversity of BristolUniversity of East Anglia
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Construct validityPsychometricsConstruct (python library)Test validitySeverity of illness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the practicality, validity, and responsiveness of the proxy Child Health Utility-9 Dimensions (CHU9D) in children aged 2 to 5 years. METHODS: We used data from the Barrier Enhancement for Eczema Prevention trial, a UK randomized controlled trial testing whether daily emollients in infancy could prevent eczema in high-risk infants. The main parent/carer completed the proxy CHU9D using developers' additional guidance for completion in those younger than 5 years and the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at ages 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. Practicality was assessed by completion rates. Construct validity assessed whether CHU9D could discriminate between those with/without eczema and between eczema severity levels on POEM. Responsiveness was determined by ability to discriminate between 3 groups: (1) those whose POEM score deteriorated ≥3 points, (2) those whose change was not clinically important (-2.9 to 2.9 points), and (3) those whose POEM score improved ≥3 points. Analysis was conducted in Stata 17. RESULTS: Of 1394 children participating in the Barrier Enhancement for Eczema Prevention trial, study questionnaires were completed by 1212 (87%), 981 (70%), 990 (71%), and 976 (70%) at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. Of these the CHU9D was completed by 1066 (88.0%), 685 (69.8%), 925 (93.4%), and 923 (94.6%), respectively. Mean utility at all time points was approximately 0.934 (range 0.443-1). For construct validity, very small differences in the CHU9D between known groups were observed (P < .01). A total of 801 participants had responsiveness data: 13% deteriorated, 72% had nonclinically important change, and 15% improved. Mean utility change (standardized response mean) for these groups was -0.0198 (0.21), 0.0041 (0.05), and 0.0175 (0.21) showing small change and small responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Proxy CHU9D in 2- to 5-year-old children shows potential but further research is needed.

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)0.068
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.212
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0680.212
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)→Same topicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies→French-language works237,207→