ArticleDigital health
Using machine learning to modify and enhance the daily living questionnaire.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors for thyroid nodules in a health examination population: a cross-sectional study and development of a simplified predictive model.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Assessing Functional Cognition and Health During COVID-19 Pandemic: Gender Differences Among Community-Dwelling Adults.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Daily Living Questionnaire (DLQ) constitutes one of a number of functional cognitive measures, commonly employed in a range of medical and rehabilitation settings. One of the drawbacks of the DLQ is its length which poses an obstacle to conducting efficient and widespread screening of the public and which incurs inaccuracies due to the length and fatigue of the subjects. Objective: This study aims to use Machine Learning (ML) to modify and abridge the DLQ without compromising its fidelity and accuracy. Method: Participants were interviewed in two separate research studies conducted in the United States of America and Israel, and one unified file was created for ML analysis. An ML-based Computerized Adaptive Testing (ML-CAT) algorithm was applied to the DLQ database to create an adaptive testing instrument-with a shortened test form adapted to individual test scores. Results: The ML-CAT approach was shown to reduce the number of tests required on average by 25% per individual when predicting each of the seven DLQ output scores independently and reduce by over 50% when predicting all seven scores concurrently using a single model. These results maintained an accuracy of 95% (5% error) across subject scores. The study pinpoints which DLQ items are more informative in predicting DLQ scores. Conclusions: Applying the ML-CAT model can thus serve to modify, refine and even abridge the current DLQ, thereby enabling wider community screening while also enhancing clinical and research utility.
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.