Validation of the IMPACT questionnaire for measuring health-related quality of life in paediatric inflammatory bowel disease: sensibility, validity and reliability testing in a paediatric cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPACT, a disease-specific measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The goals of this thesis were to assess IMPACT's sensibility, validity and reliability. Using Feinstein's principles a qualitative and 'quantitative' assessment of sensibility was conducted. The patient and physician participants strongly endorsed the sensibility of IMPACT. The IMPACT total score showed excellent test-retest reliability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.90. The internal consistency rating was also excellent with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.96. Construct validity testing was conducted because of the lack of a gold standard with which to assess HRQOL. All constructs supported the validity of the questionnaire for measuring HRQOL in paediatric IBD patients. No significant influence of patient diagnosis (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis) or age was noted. A patient's assessment of their HRQOL appears to be most influenced by their current status, rather their disease course over the past year.
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 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".