Qualitative Development of the PROMIS(R) Pediatric Stress Response Item Banks
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
OBJECTIVE: To describe the qualitative development of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Pediatric Stress Response item banks. METHODS: Stress response concepts were specified through a literature review and interviews with content experts, children, and parents. A library comprising 2,677 items derived from 71 instruments was developed. Items were classified into conceptual categories; new items were written and redundant items were removed. Items were then revised based on cognitive interviews (n = 39 children), readability analyses, and translatability reviews. RESULTS: 2 pediatric Stress Response sub-domains were identified: somatic experiences (43 items) and psychological experiences (64 items). Final item pools cover the full range of children's stress experiences. Items are comprehensible among children aged ≥8 years and ready for translation. CONCLUSIONS: Child- and parent-report versions of the item banks assess children's somatic and psychological states when demands tax their adaptive capabilities.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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