Development and Psychometric Evaluation of 2 Age‐stratified Versions of the Pediatric GERD Symptom and Quality of Life Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Pediatric Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptom and Quality of Life Questionnaire (PGSQ) represents 2 related age-stratified tools developed to assess pediatric gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). These include the PGSQ-Cp (for children ages 2 to 8 years, parent/caregiver report) and the PGSQ-A (for adolescents ages 9-17 years). The objective of the present study was to develop and evaluate PGSQ measurement properties. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PGSQ items were generated based on information from focus groups, expert clinician review, and cognitive debriefing interviews. The symptoms of pediatric GERD and the effect of these symptoms were addressed. The tools were evaluated in a 3-week psychometric evaluation with participants from 11 clinical sites in the United States. The study included other measures such as the Pediatric Quality of Life questionnaire (PedsQL) and clinician-rated GERD severity. After item reduction, internal consistency, reproducibility, construct validity, known-group validity, and responsiveness were assessed. RESULTS: The 231 participants included 75 parents of children ages 2 to 8 years and 75 children ages 9 to 17 years with GERD and 41 parents of children and 40 children ages 9 to 17 years without GERD. Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated 4 symptom subscales for the PGSQ-Cp and 3 symptom subscales for the PGSQ-A. Both had subscales for total impact and school impact. High to moderate internal consistency was observed, ranging from 0.76 to 0.96 for the PGSQ-Cp and from 0.67 to 0.94 for the PGSQ-A. The PGSQ significantly differentiated between patients with GERD and controls (P < 0.0001, PGSQ-Cp; P < 0.0022-0.0001, PGSQ-A) and demonstrated responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of both versions of the PGSQ. The instruments should be useful for clinical studies.
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 | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".