Screening Children with Asthma for Psychosocial Adjustment Problems: A Tool for Health Care Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a brief questionnaire for health care professionals to use in screening children with asthma for psychosocial adjustment problems. METHOD: The initial version of the Childhood Asthma Resiliency Questionnaire (CARQ) listed 85 items focusing on self-esteem, medical fears, peer relationships, family relations, stress, and depression. The number of items was reduced after focus groups and pilot testing. In pilot tests, 100 children with asthma completed the CARQ. Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Another sample of 73 children with mild asthma was also obtained. RESULTS: The total CARQ score was significantly correlated (p < 0.001) with Total Problems, Internalizing, and Externalizing Problems on the CBCL. Children with more hospitalizations and more days of school missed from asthma had significantly higher scores on the CARQ compared to children with less functional morbidity. CONCLUSION: The CARQ appears to be a useful brief measure to help clinicians identify children at risk for problems adjusting to asthma.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".