The youth report version of the <scp>C</scp>hild and <scp>A</scp>dolescent <scp>S</scp>cale of <scp>P</scp>articipation (<scp>CASP</scp>): assessment of psychometric properties and comparison with parent report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation (CASP) parent report is a brief and valid measure for use with children and youth with chronic conditions/disabilities that has been shown to have good coverage at the chapter level of the 'Activities and Participation' component of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. The purpose of this research was to assess the psychometric properties of a CASP youth self-report version, to further validate the parent report, and to compare parent and youth reports of youths' activity and participation. METHODS: Baseline data from a longitudinal study examining predictors of changes in quality of life for youth with chronic conditions/disabilities were used. CASP data were collected on 409 youth aged 11-17 with various conditions/disabilities using youth and parent reports. Internal consistency and factor structure were examined for both versions using Cronbach's alpha and exploratory factor analyses. Inter-rater agreement and magnitude of differences between youth and parent report were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients and paired t-tests respectively. Gender, age and condition/disability group differences in youth report CASP scores were examined using independent t-tests or analyses of variance. RESULTS: Strong internal consistency and internal structure validity was demonstrated for the CASP youth and parent report. The youth report factor structure was similar to the parent report in this and other studies. Youth reported their activity/participation to be significantly higher than did their parents. Significant differences in CASP scores were found among condition/disability groups. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that, from a psychometric standpoint, the youth version of the CASP is a promising new self-report measure of activity and participation. As youth perceive their activity and participation levels differently than their parents, it is important to collect data from both sources to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of this aspect of youths' lives.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".