MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211301062 · doi:10.7717/peerj.1567

Validation of the “Quality of Life in School” instrument in Canadian elementary school students

2016· article· en· W2211301062 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Satvinder Ghotra, Jessie‐Lee D. McIsaac, Sara Kirk, Stefan Kuhle

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsCronbach's alphaConstruct validityQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineExploratory factor analysisPopulationCeiling effectPsychometricsPsychologyClinical psychologyNursingAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. School is an integral component of the life of a child, and thus quality of school life is an important part of the overall quality of life experienced by a child. There are a few instruments available to measure the quality of school life but they are often not available in English, or they are not appropriate for use alongside other instruments in a survey of young children. The Quality of Life in School (QoLS) instrument is a short, self-report measure to assess elementary school students' perception of their quality of school life in four domains. The instrument was developed in Israel and has been validated among Hebrew-speaking children. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the QoLS measure in Canadian elementary school children. Methods. A total of 629 children attending grades 4-6 were recruited in a population-based cross-sectional study. The QoLS measure was administered to participating children by trained research assistants. In addition, their socio-demographic details and academic data were also obtained. The psychometric testing included exploratory factor analysis and reliability estimation using internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha). Construct validity was investigated using the known groups comparisons for discriminative validity and via convergent validity. Results. A four-factor structure was generated explaining 39% of the total variance in the model. The results showed good internal consistency and acceptable floor and ceiling effects. Cronbach's Alpha ranged from 0.75 to 0.93. Known groups comparisons showed that the QoLS measure discriminated well between subgroups on the basis of gender, grade, and academic achievement, thus providing evidence of construct validity. The convergent validity was also appropriate with all the four domains demonstrating moderate to strong correlations to each other and to the total QoLS score. Conclusions. QoLS appears to be a valid and reliable measure for quality of school life assessment in young Canadian children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.795

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207