Development and Preliminary Validation of the Questionnaire on Pediatric Gastrointestinal Symptoms to Assess Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders in Children and Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a questionnaire assessing symptoms associated with pediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) and to provide preliminary evidence for its validity and reliability in a tertiary care setting. METHODS: The Questionnaire on Pediatric Gastrointestinal Symptoms (QPGS) was designed as both a parent report and child self-report measure based on the pediatric Rome II criteria for FGIDs. It was constructed in English, translated into French, and pilot tested in both languages. Initial validation was performed using the French version. Participants were 315 consecutive new patients aged 4 to 18, and their parents, presenting to a gastroenterology clinic and classified as having a functional problem. Content validity, item discrimination capacity, and reliability (parent-child concordance and temporal stability) were examined. RESULTS: Analyses of parent and child reports indicated that all items were pertinent and variably distributed. Although children were reliable reporters, up to 42% of parents did not know about their children's gastrointestinal functioning. As many as 60% of parents of children 10 to 18 could not respond to questions about defecation and subjective symptoms. Concordance was generally fair to good, with Kappas and intraclass correlations of 0.40 to 0.70 on most items. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good for the majority of items. CONCLUSION: This study supports the content validity of the QPGS. Form A is a reliable measure for parents of children 4 to 9 years old, but the child self-report Form C appears to be more reliable for 10 to 18 year olds.
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 | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".