MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255392883 · doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.1429

Validation of the "Quality of Life in School" instrument in Canadian elementary school students

2015· preprint· en· W4255392883 on OpenAlexaffabout
Satvinder Ghotra, Jessie‐Lee D. McIsaac, Sara Kirk, Stefan Kuhle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaConstruct validityQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyExploratory factor analysisPopulationMedicineFace validityConstruct (python library)Quality (philosophy)PsychometricsMedical educationClinical psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: School is an integral component of the life of a child and thus, quality of school life is an important part of the overall quality of life experienced by a child. Quality of school life may be an important outcome for the assessment of Health Promoting Schools, which is an approach used internationally to improve students’ educational and health outcomes in school in an integrated and holistic way. There are a few instruments available to measure the quality of school life but they are often not available in English, or they are not appropriate for use alongside with other instruments in a survey of young children. The Quality of Life in School (QoLS) instrument is a short self-report measure to assess elementary school students’ perception of their quality of school life in four domains. The instrument was developed in Israel and has been validated among Hebrew-speaking children. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the QoLS measure in Canadian elementary school children. Methods: 629 children attending grades 4 to 6 were recruited in a population-based cross-sectional study. The QoLS measure was administered to participating children by trained research assistants. In addition, their socio-demographic details and academic data were also obtained. The psychometric testing included exploratory factor analysis and reliability estimation using internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha). Construct validity was investigated using the known groups comparisons for discriminative validity and via convergent validity. Results: A four-factor structure was generated explaining 39% of the total variance in the model. The results showed good internal consistency and acceptable floor and ceiling effects. Cronbach's Alpha ranged from 0.75 to 0.93. Known groups comparisons showed that the QoLS measure discriminated well between subgroups on the basis of gender, grade, and academic achievement, thus providing evidence of construct validity. The convergent validity was also appropriate with all the four domains demonstrating moderate to strong correlations to each other and to the total QoLS score. Conclusions: QoLS appears to be a valid and reliable measure for quality of school life assessment in young Canadian children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207