Shortening the paediatric Haemophilia Activities List (pedHAL) based on pooled data from international studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The paediatric Haemophilia Activities List (pedHAL) was developed to measure activities and participation in children and youth with haemophilia. Results from international studies provide an opportunity to determine which items are universally important. Aim The aim of this study was to determine which items of the pedHAL are redundant to construct a shorter version of the pedHAL. Methods This study is a cross‐sectional multicentre secondary analysis on pooled data of published studies using the pedHAL (7 domains, 53 items, optimum score: 100) in children with haemophilia A/B aged 4–18 years. To identify redundant items, the following aspects were evaluated: floor and ceiling effects, proportions of missing and ‘not applicable’ responses, inter‐item correlations, component loadings in an exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency and item‐total correlations. Results Data on 315 patients with haemophilia from 6 studies were evaluated. Median age was 12.2 years) (range 4.0–18.0), 87.3% had severe haemophilia and 80.3% received prophylaxis. Median (IQR) pedHAL sum score was 96.7 (88.0–100). After a stepwise procedure, 31 items were removed, resulting in a pedHALshort of 22 items, representing all original 7 domains. Most remaining items belonged to the domains ‘sitting/kneeling/standing’ and ‘functions of the legs’. The pedHALshort sum score was similar to the original pedHAL sum score, with small differences in 5 domains. Conclusion This clinimetric study resulted in >50% reduction of the length of the pedHAL. The 22‐item pedHALshort reduces patient burden and is expected to capture the information on activities and participation. The pedHALshort needs validation in other populations.
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 | 0.049 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".