The Responsiveness of the Modified Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To determine the ability of the revised version of the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ), the VASCHAQ, to detect clinical change over time in pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). We studied the relative responsiveness of the VASCHAQ as compared to the original CHAQ-30 and revised CHAQ-38, as well as the parent-patient, physician-patient, and physician-parent concordance. Methods. The CHAQ-38 and VASCHAQ were administered to 30 parents and patients (if older than 8 years) with any subtype of JIA before and after the start of a new treatment. The standardized response means (SRM) were calculated for the VASCHAQ, the original CHAQ-30, and the CHAQ-38. Comparisons of SRM were made using the relative SRM. Parent-patient, physician-patient, and physician-parent concordances were assessed by calculating a series of intraclass correlation coefficients. Results. Twenty-seven parents and 21 patients completed questionnaires at both visits. All questionnaires demonstrated large responsiveness; however, the VASCHAQ was found to be about 25% more responsive than both the original CHAQ-30 and CHAQ-38. Conclusion. The VASCHAQ was moderately more responsive than the CHAQ-30 and CHAQ-38 in both parent and patient groups and should be considered for use in studies evaluating change in function over time.
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 | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".