Higher Child-Reported Internalizing and Parent-Reported Externalizing Behaviors were Associated with Decreased Quality of Life among Pediatric Cardiac Patients Independent of Diagnosis: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pediatric cardiology patients often experience decreased quality of life (QoL) and higher rates of mental illness, particularly with severe disease, but the relationship between them and comparisons across diagnostic groups are limited. This mixed-methods cross-sectional study assessed the association between QoL anxiety and behavior problems among children with structural heart disease, arrhythmia, or other cardiac diagnoses. Methods: Children (6–14 years, n = 76, 50% female) and their parents completed measures of QoL (PedsQL), behavior (BASC-2, subset of 19 children) and anxiety (MASC-2, children 8+ years). Pearson correlations/regression models examined associations between QoL, behavior and anxiety, controlling for age, sex, diagnosis and condition severity. Student t-tests compared results to published normative values. Semi-structured interviews (15 children, 13 parents) examined self- and parent-reported perceptions of the patient’s emotional health. Results: Child reported social QoL (95% CI difference: −11.0, −2.1), emotional well-being (95% CI difference: −12.5, −3.8) and adjustment skills (95% CI difference: −13.9, −3.0) were significantly below published norms (p < 0.05). Neither age, sex, nor diagnosis were significantly related to questionnaire responses. Compared to children with mild conditions, child and parent-reported QoL was significantly lower in children with complex conditions (np2 ≥ 0.14, p < 0.05). Lower QoL was strongly associated with more internalizing problems based on both child (r = −0.78, p < 0.001) and parent (r = −0.67, p < 0.001) reports. Interview responses suggested emotional distress was attributed to “normal” child problems rather than the child’s cardiac problem. Conclusion: Children with complex cardiac conditions, regardless of diagnosis, had diminished QoL. Using the PedsQL in clinical settings may help identify pediatric cardiology patients experiencing emotional distress (i.e., anxiety and depression).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".