MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020297177 · doi:10.1080/02770900600857267

Screening Children with Asthma for Psychosocial Adjustment Problems: A Tool for Health Care Professionals

2006· article· en· W2020297177 on OpenAlexaff
S. Gupta, Susan Crawford, Ian Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asthma · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCBCLAsthmaMedicinePsychosocialChecklistDepression (economics)Child Behavior ChecklistHealth professionalsFamily medicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryHealth carePediatricsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AsthmaSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207