Psychometric properties of the quality of life questionnaire for children with CP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the development and psychometric properties of a condition-specific quality of life instrument for children with cerebral palsy (CP QOL-Child). A sample of 205 primary caregivers of children with CP aged 4 to 12 years (mean 8y 5mo) and 53 children aged 9 to 12 years completed the CP QOL-Child. The children (112 males, 93 females) were sampled across Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels (Level I=18%, II=28%, III=14%, IV=11%, V=27%). Primary caregivers also completed other measures of child health (Child Health Questionnaire; CHQ), QOL (KIDSCREEN), and functioning (GMFCS). Internal consistency ranged from 0.74 to 0.92 for primary caregivers and from 0.80 to 0.90 for child self-report. For primary caregivers, 2-week test-retest reliability ranged from 0.76 to 0.89. The validity of the CP QOL is supported by the pattern of correlations between CP QOL-Child scales with the CHQ, KIDSCREEN, and GMFCS. Preliminary statistics suggest that the child self-report questionnaire has acceptable psychometric properties. The questionnaire can be freely accessed at http://www.deakin.edu.ac/hmnbs/chase/cerebralpalsy/cp_qol_home.php
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 | 0.011 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".