Comparison of pediatric self reports and parent proxy reports utilizing PROMIS: Results from a chiropractic practice-based research network
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 measure the cross-informant variant of pediatric quality of life (QoL) based on self-reports and parent proxy measures. METHODS: A secondary analysis of baseline data obtained from two independent studies measuring the QoL based on the pediatric PROMIS-25 self-report and the PROMIS parent-proxy items banks. A scoring manual associated raw scores to a T score metric (mean = 50; SD = 10). Reliability of QoL ratings utilized the ICC while comparison of mean T Scores utilized the unpaired t-test. RESULTS: A total of 289 parent-child dyads comprised our study responders. Average age for parents and children was 41.27 years and 12.52 years, respectively. The mean T score (child self-report: parent proxy) for each QoL domains were: mobility (50.82:52.58), anxiety (46.73:44.21), depression (45.18:43.60), fatigue (45.59:43.92), peer-relationships (52.15:52.88) and pain interference (47.47:44.80). CONCLUSION: Parents tend to over-estimate their child's QoL based on measures of anxiety, depression, fatigue, peer-relationships and pain interference.
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 | 0.039 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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