Predictors of Health-Related Quality of Life in Neurodivergent Children: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) is a multi-faceted construct influenced by a myriad of environmental, demographic, and individual characteristics. Our understanding of these influencers remains highly limited in neurodevelopmental conditions. Existing research in this area is sparse, highly siloed by diagnosis labels, and focused on symptoms. This review synthesized the evidence in this area using a multi-dimensional model of HRQoL and trans-diagnostically across neurodevelopmental conditions. The systematic review, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Checklist, was completed in June 2023 using Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Our search revealed 78 studies that examined predictors of HRQoL in neurodevelopmental conditions. The majority of these studies focused on autism and ADHD with a paucity of literature in other conditions. Cross-diagnosis investigations were limited despite the fact that many of the examined predictors transcend diagnostic boundaries. Significant gaps were revealed in domains of biology/physiology, functioning, health perceptions, and environmental factors. Very preliminary evidence suggested potentially shared predictors of HRQoL across conditions including positive associations between HRQoL and adaptive functioning, male sex/gender, positive self-perception, physical activity, resources, and positive family context, and negative associations with diagnostic features and mental health symptoms. Studies of transdiagnostic predictors across neurodevelopmental conditions are critically needed to enable care models that address shared needs of neurodivergent individuals beyond diagnostic boundaries. Further understanding of HRQoL from the perspective of neurodivergent communities is a critical area of future work.
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 | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".