ArticleNursing research
Two Methods for Calculating Symptom Cluster Scores.
Article in Nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acupuncture Improves Multiple Treatment-Related Symptoms in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Tolerability and the Accelerome: Open-Source Wrist Accelerometry Relates to Symptom Burden in Androgen Ablated Older Men with Prostate Cancer.Digital biomarkersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSymptom clusters are conventionally distilled into a single score using composite scoring, which is based on the mathematical assumption that all symptoms are equivalently related to outcomes of interest; this may lead to a loss of important variation in the data.
objectivesThis article compares two ways of calculating a single score for a symptom cluster: a conventional, hypothesis-driven composite score versus a data-driven, reduced rank regression score that weights the symptoms based on their individual relationships with key outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of psychoneurological symptoms from a sample of 356 low-income mothers. Four of the psychoneurological symptoms (fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, sleep disturbance, and depressed mood) were measured with the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale; the fifth (pain) was measured using an item from the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). Mothers' function was measured using the 12-item Short Form Health Survey. The composite score was calculated by summing standardized scores for each individual psychoneurological symptom. In contrast, reduced rank regression weighted the individual symptoms using their respective associations with mothers' function; the weighted individual symptom scores were summed into the reduced rank regression symptom score.
resultsThe composite score and reduced rank regression score were highly correlated at .93. The cluster of psychoneurological symptoms accounted for 53.7% of the variation in the mothers' function. Depressed mood and pain accounted for almost all the explained variation in mothers' function at 37.2% and 15.0%, respectively. DISCUSSION: The composite score approach was simpler to calculate, and the high correlation with the reduced rank regression score indicates that the composite score reflected most of the variation explained by the reduced rank regression approach in this data set. However, the reduced rank regression analysis provided additional information by identifying pain and depressed mood as having the strongest association with a mother's function, which has implications for understanding which symptoms to target in future interventions. Future studies should also explore composite versus reduced rank regression approaches given that reduced rank regression may yield different insights in other data sets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.