P0255 DEVELOPMENT OF A PEDIATRIC POST-LIVER TRANSPLANT DISEASE-SPECIFIC HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE QUESTIONNAIRE (ITEM GENERATION)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: In pediatric patients who are post-liver transplant (post-OLT) the use of generic measures describes a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) slightly lower, but reasonable, compared with the same age general population. However these measures, although useful do not provide a detailed enough description of post-OLT children and their issues of well-being. Therefore to obtain a more discriminative and evaluative measure a disease specific questionnaire is required. We describe the initial development stage, item generation, of an ongoing project to create a disease-specific HRQOL measure for pediatric patients. Methods: All children and adolescents, up to age 18 inclusive, who are at least one-year post-OLT and are followed at the IWK Liver Transplant Clinic were approached and asked to participate in the process of item generation. Separate, individual interviews were held with the child and their parent(s). A non-healthcare team member with a psychology background conducted interviews. If a face-to-face interview was not possible a phone interview was conducted. Two separate focus groups were also held, one for patients and one for their family members. A descriptive analysis was used for this stage of item generation. Results: 16 of 23 potential patient participants (mean age 12.4 years (range 8.2 to 15.2) were interviewed. They had a mean age at transplant of 4.9 years (range 0.6 to 15.2). Focus groups included 9 patient participants and 23 parent and sibling participants. 112 novel items were generated. A judgmental process was used to categorize items into the following domains: social/functional impairment, emotional, tests/treatments, family functioning, and systemic functioning. Some general themes were noted: age at transplant appeared to influence how patients felt the transplant had affected their life (younger age at transplant, peceived less affect on current status), patients voiced more concerns about medication/treatments, parents had concerns about future health status. Conclusion: Numerous items covering five domains were identified by participants as influencing their HRQOL post-OLT. To ensure all potential, relevant items have been obtained, two transplant centres (Edmonton, Toronto) will carry out a similar item generation process. From this, an item reduction questionnaire will be developed and administered to patient and proxy participants to obtain the items to be included in the final questionnaire. Once developed this questionnaire will need to undergo rigorous validation, reliability, responsiveness and sensibility testing in a multi-centre study.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».