MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366776651 · doi:10.1556/650.2023.32743

Cerebralis paresisben szenvedő gyermekek egészségindexe

2023· article· hu· W4366776651 on OpenAlex
Dalma Molnár-Hevér, Zoltán Bejek, Gyula Domos, Brigitta Firnigel, Nikoletta Horváth, Sándor Kiss, Gerda L’Auné, Gábor Skaliczki, Norbert Szakály, György Szőke, Mátyás Vezér, Unni Narayanan, Tamás Terebessy

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrvosi Hetilap · 2023
Typearticle
Languagehu
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaConstruct validityQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyCerebral palsyAmbulatoryReliability (semiconductor)Face validityInter-rater reliabilityClinical psychologyTest (biology)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyRating scaleSurgeryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Caregiver Priorities and Child Health Index of Life with Disabilities (CPCHILD) questionnaire is a measurement tool for assessing health status and wellbeing of disabled children, which evaluates children's quality of life from the caregiver point of view. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our work was the Hungarian translation and cultural adaptation of the questionnaire and also validation of the CPCHILD on Hungarian cerebral palsy patients. Further aim was to test the eligibility of the questionnaire for superficial assessment of caregiver's psychological attitudes. METHOD: Translation of the questionnaire was carried out according to the Beaton's guidelines. Test-retest, interrater reliability (ICC) and also internal consistency (Cronbach-alpha) were calculated for reliability. The importance of the questions was assessed for face validity and known group validity test was done to measure construct validity. For examining parental attitudes, the patients were divided into ambulatory and non-ambulatory groups and the 36 quality of life questions of the 7th domain were used to find relations. RESULTS: During test-retest reliability measurements, the ICC was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.88-0.98), and Cronbach-alpha exceeded the minimal expected value of 0.7 (0.74-0.97) except in the 5th domain (0.67), while measuring interrater reliability the ICC was 0.87 (95% CI 0.70-0.94). Face validity was above the 2.0 threshold in every question (2.6-4.5; mean: 3.4 ± 1.34) and the known group validity calculations showed significant differences between the CPCHILD scores of ambulatory and non-ambulatory groups. Examining parental attitudes, a significant difference was also shown among the parents of ambulatory and non-ambulatory children in assessing the importance of sitting in the quality of life of their children (2.89 ± 1.28 vs. 3.51 ± 0.82; p<0.01). CONCLUSION: The final outcome of our study is that CPCHILD questionnaire has become widely accessible in Hungarian language. Our result, that the answers referring to the sitting abilities and the activities should be carried out in sitting position, was significantly different among the caregivers of the ambulatory and non-ambulatory children, showing that the parents of the GMFCS IV and V category children evaluate the importance of sitting ability higher compared to those parents who care for GMFCS I, II and III category children. Furthermore, the results draw attention to the wellbeing and health of the children measurable with CPCHILD as well as that parental caregiver attitudes can be recognized which may give further help in finding the balance between expectations and possibilities during the rehabilitation of cerebral palsy children. Orv Hetil. 2023; 164(16): 610-617.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.019

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.260 · 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