Validation of the parent global assessment as a health-related quality of life measure in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from ReACCh-Out
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To (i) validate the JIA parent global assessment (parent global) as a health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument; (ii) evaluate measurement properties of accepted HRQoL measures relative to those of the parent global; and (iii) assess causal pathways determining parent global scores. METHODS: Data from the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children emphasizing outcomes (ReACCh-Out) cohort were used. Measurement properties were assessed in 344 patients at enrolment and 6 months later. Causal pathways were tested by structural equation modelling to understand root causes and mediators leading to parent global scores. RESULTS: Construct validity was supported by Spearman correlations of 0.53-0.70 for the parent global with the Juvenile Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire, Quality of My Life health scale (HRQoML), Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)-Parent, and Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ)-Physical. Exceptions were PedsQL-Child (0.44) and CHQ-Psychosocial (0.31). Correlations were lower (0.14-0.49) with disease activity measures (physician global assessment of disease activity, active joint count, ESR). Responsiveness of the parent global to improvement according to parent ratings (0.51) was acceptable and within the range (0.32-0.71) of that of other measures. Reliability estimates and measurement errors for all measures were unsatisfactory, likely due to the prolonged time between assessments. Causal pathways for the parent global matched those previously reported for HRQoML. CONCLUSIONS: Our results offer support for the parent global as a valid measure of HRQoL for JIA. If confirmed, existing studies using the parent global may be re-interpreted, enhancing our knowledge of HRQoL in children with JIA.
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 | 0.024 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".