Asthma Control Questionnaire in children: validation, measurement properties, interpretation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) has been validated in adults to measure the primary goal of management (minimisation of symptoms, activity limitations, short-acting β₂-agonist use and airway narrowing). The present study evaluated the validity, measurement properties and interpretability of the ACQ in children aged 6-16 yrs. 35 children attended clinic on three occasions (0, 1 and 4 weeks) and completed the ACQ, Mini Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and the Royal College of Physicians' "Three Questions". Parents completed the Paediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire. Between visits, children completed the Asthma Control Diary and measured peak expiratory flow. At weeks 1 and 4, clinicians and parents completed Global Rating of Change Questionnaires. All patients completed the study. 19 children were stable between two assessments and provided evidence of good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.79). The ACQ was responsive to change in asthma control (p = 0.026) and the mean ± sd Minimal Important Difference was 0.52 ± 0.45. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal correlations between the ACQ and the other outcomes were close to predicted and provided evidence that the ACQ measures asthma control in children. The ACQ has strong measurement properties and is valid for use in children aged 6-16 yrs. In children aged 6-10 yrs, it must be administered by a trained interviewer.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it