Prospective Evaluation of Health-Related Quality-of-Life in Children with Craniosynostosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo investigate health-related quality of life (HRQL) in children aged 2 to 7 years, who have undergone surgery for craniosynostosis.DesignCross-sectional survey.SettingA tertiary pediatric academic medical center.ParticipantsChildren with craniosynostosis who underwent surgical correction, and who were 2-7 years old at the time of the study. Children from families that did not speak English were excluded.InterventionsCaregivers were asked to fill out the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) Core Parent Report and the PedsQL Cognitive Functioning Scale.Main outcome measuresPedsQL: Psychosocial Health Summary Score, Physical Health Summary Score, Total Core Score, Cognitive Functioning Scale Score. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting greater QoLSubject factors: comorbidities, syndromic status, type of craniosynostosis, type of surgeryResultsThe study included 53 subjects, of whom 13.2% had a syndrome. Core and cognitive scores did not depend on presence of a syndrome or suture involved. Subjects who underwent posterior cranial distraction achieved higher Total Core Scores than subjects who underwent open vault remodeling. Among subjects with sagittal craniosynostosis, there was a tendency for higher scores among children who underwent minimally-invasive surgery compared to those who underwent open vault remodeling.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates similar HRQL among children with and without a syndrome, higher HRQL among children undergoing posterior cranial distraction than those undergoing open vault remodeling, and trends towards higher HRQL in children with sagittal craniosynostosis who underwent minimally-invasive surgery compared to those who underwent open vault remodeling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".