Updating the Canadian Hemophilia Outcomes–Kids’ Life Assessment Tool (CHO‐KLAT) in the era of extended half‐life clotting factor concentrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The purpose of this study was to review and update the content of the Canadian Hemophilia Outcomes–Kids’ Life Assessment Tool version 2.0 (CHO-KLAT), in the context of extended half-life (EHL) factor concentrates (FCs) and to establish the validity and reliability of the updated CHO-KLAT. Methods Focus groups were conducted with boys with hemophilia, their parents, and health care providers across Canada to review the CHO-KLAT v2.0 and determine if any modifications were required. The validity of the revised CHO-KLAT (version 3.0) was then determined in a sample of boys with hemophilia and their parents by calculating its correlation with the Pediatric Quality of Life Core Module (PedsQL-Core). Test-retest reliability was assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results Thirteen focus groups at 5 pediatric hemophilia treatment centers (HTCs) (n = 71) resulted in 19 changes to the CHO-KLAT v2.0, generating a revised 40-item CHO-KLAT, the CHO-KLAT v3.0. Thirty-five boys with hemophilia (median age, 14; range, 7–17 years) and 47 parents participated in the validation of the CHO-KLAT v3.0. There was a moderate correlation between the CHO-KLAT v3.0 child self-report and PedsQL-Core (r = 0.56, P = .01), and a strong correlation between the CHO-KLAT v3.0 parent-proxy and PedsQL-Core (r = .79, P = .0007). The test-retest reliability ICC was 0.90 for the child self-report CHO-KLAT v3.0 and 0.68 for the parent-proxy CHO-KLAT v3.0. Conclusion The CHO-KLAT v3.0 is a reliable and valid child-centric tool that effectively measures health-related quality of life in boys with hemophilia who are receiving standard half-life or EHL FCs.
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 | 0.010 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".