Assessing Whether Measurement Invariance of the KIDSCREEN-27 across Child-Parent Dyad Depends on the Child Gender: A Multiple Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to assess the measurement invariance (MI) of the KIDSCREEN-27 questionnaire across girl-parent and boy-parent dyad to clarify how child gender affects the agreement between children's and parents' perception of the meaning of the items in the questionnaire. The child self-reports and parent proxy-reports of the KIDSCREEN-27 were completed by 1061 child-parent dyad. Multiple group categorical confirmatory factor analysis (MGCCFA) was applied to assess MI. The non-invariant items across girl-parent dyad were mostly detected in the psychological well-being and the social support and peers domains. Moreover, the boys and their parents differed mainly in the autonomy and parent relation domain. Detecting different non-invariant items across the girl-parent dyad compared to the boy-parent dyad underlines the importance of taking the child's gender into account when assessing measurement invariance between children and their parents and consequently deciding about children's physical, psychological or social well-being from the parents' viewpoint.
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 | 0.022 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".