Validity of Three Measures of Health‐related Quality of Life in Children with Intractable Epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Validity studies on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales for pediatric epilepsy are few, and cross-validation with other samples has not been reported. This study was designed to assess the validity of three parent-rated measures of HRQOL in pediatric epilepsy: (a) the Impact of Childhood Illness Scale (ICI), (b) the Impact of Child Neurologic Handicap Scale (ICNH), and (c) the Hague Restrictions in Epilepsy Scale (HARCES). METHODS: Retrospective data were examined for 44 children with intractable epilepsy. Validity was assessed by evaluating differences across epilepsy severity groups as well as correlations between HRQOL scales and neurologic variables (seizure severity, epilepsy duration, current/prior antiepileptic medications) and psychosocial measures (emotional functioning, IQ, social skills, adaptive behavior). Scale overlap with a global QOL rating also was assessed. RESULTS: The HRQOL measures were moderately to highly intercorrelated. The scales differed in terms of their associations with criterion measures. The HARCES was related to the highest number of neurologic variables and the ICNH to the fewest. All three scales were related to psychosocial functioning and to global quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the three measures are likely adequate measures of HRQOL for use in intractable childhood epilepsy. The measures were highly intercorrelated, and they were all broadly related to criterion measures reflecting specific domains of HRQOL as well as global QOL. Some differences between scales emerged, however, that suggest care in choosing HRQOL instruments for children with epilepsy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".