International cross‐cultural validation study of the Canadian Haemophilia Outcomes: Kids’ Life Assessment Tool
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment is recognized as an important outcome in the evaluation of different therapeutic regimens for persons with haemophilia. The Canadian Haemophilia Outcomes-Kids' Life Assessment Tool (CHO-KLAT) is a disease-specific measure of HRQoL for 4 to 18-year-old boys with haemophilia. The purpose of this study was to extend this disease-specific, child-centric, outcome measure for use in international clinical trials. We adapted the North American English CHO-KLAT version for use in five countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom (UK). The process included four stages: (i) translation; (ii) cognitive debriefing; (iii) validity assessment relative to the PedsQL (generic) and the Haemo-QoL (disease-specific) and (iv) assessment of inter and intra-rater reliability. Cognitive debriefing was performed in 57 boys (mean age 11.4 years), validation was performed in 144 boys (mean age 11.0 years) and reliability was assessed for a subgroup of 64 boys (mean age 12.0 years). Parents also participated. The mean scores reported by the boys were high: CHO-KLAT 77.0 (SD = 11.2); PedsQL 83.8 (SD = 11.9) and Haemo-QoL 79.6 (SD = 11.5). Correlations between the CHO-KLAT and PedsQL ranged from 0.63 in Germany to 0.39 in the Netherlands and Spain. Test-retest reliability (concordance) for child self-report was 0.67. Child-parent concordance was slightly lower at 0.57. The CHO-KLAT has been fully culturally adapted and validated for use in five different languages and cultures (in England, the Netherlands, France, Germany and Spain) where treatment is readily available either on demand or as prophylaxis.
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 | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".