Development and validation of a parent-proxy health-related quality of life survey for Australian First Nations children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Within Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) populations perceive health and well-being differently to non-Indigenous Australians. Existing health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) measurement tools do not account for these differences. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a culturally specific parent-proxy HR-QoL measurement tool for First Nations children. Design Scale development was informed by parents/carers of children with a chronic illness and an expert panel. The preliminary 39-item survey was reviewed (n=12) and tested (n=163) with parents/carers of First Nations children aged 0–12 years at baseline with comparative scales: the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, generic HR-QoL (Paediatric QoL Inventory 4.0, PedsQL 4.0 ) and Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale, and repeated (n=46) 4 weeks later. Exploratory Factor Analysis was used for scale reduction. Reliability and validity were assessed by internal consistency, test–retest, and correlations with comparison scales. Results Items within our First Nations-Child Quality of Life (FirstNations-CQoL) were internally consistent with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of ≥0.7 (quality of life, 0.808; patient experience, 0.880; patient support, 0.768) and overall test–retest reliability was good (r=0.75; 95% CI 0.593 to 0.856). Convergent validity was observed with the PedsQL 4.0 with Pearson’s coefficients of r=0.681 (ages 2–4 years); r=0.651 (ages 5–12 years) and with the Kessler Psychological Distress scale (r=−0.513). Divergent validity against the Spence Anxiety Scale was not demonstrated. Conclusions The FirstNations-CQoL scale was accepted by the participants, reliable and demonstrated convergent validity with comparison measures. This tool requires further evaluation to determine responsiveness, its minimal important difference and clinical utility.
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 | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".