MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023852907 · doi:10.3171/ped.2004.101.2.0134

An instrument to measure the health status in children with hydrocephalus: the Hydrocephalus Outcome Questionnaire

2004· article· en· W3023852907 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCronbach's alphaConstruct validityHydrocephalusInter-rater reliabilityHealth Utilities IndexStrengths and Difficulties QuestionnairePhysical therapyClinical psychologyPsychometricsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMental healthPsychiatryRating scaleDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECT: In the measurement of clinical outcome in pediatric patients with hydrocephalus the condition's effects on a child's physical, emotional, cognitive, and social health are frequently ignored. The authors developed a quantitative health status measure, the Hydrocephalus Outcome Questionnaire (HOQ), designed specifically for children with hydrocephalus, which can be completed by the children's parents. METHODS: The standardized steps in the development of a health status measure were followed. Item generation required involvement of health professionals and focus groups with parents of children with hydrocephalus. A comprehensive list of 165 unique health status items was thus generated. To streamline the list, questionnaires were sent to 69 sets of parents to solicit their opinions regarding the most important of these health issues, and the 51 most significant items were then selected to represent the following health domains: physical, social-emotional, and cognitive. In another cohort of 90 sets of parents, the 51-item questionnaire was then tested for reliability and construct validity against the following independent measures of specific components of health: Health Utilities Index, Wide Range Achievement Reading Test, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaires, and Functional Independence Measure for Children. The HOQ took approximately 10 to 15 minutes for the parents to complete and demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.96), interrater reliability (0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.93), and internal consistency (Cronbach alpha 0.94). Pearson correlation testing demonstrated very good construct validity between domain scores and their respective independent measures. CONCLUSIONS: The HOQ for children with hydrocephalus demonstrated excellent reliability and validity properties. This tool will be valuable for a wide range of clinical research projects in pediatric hydrocephalus.

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 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · 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