Psychometric properties of the Hebrew KIDSCREEN 52, 27 and 10 items: a cross-sectional study of self and parents reports in youth with and without physical disabilities.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2025-03-13 DOI:10.1007/s11136-025-03941-y
Sharon Barak, Jana Landa, Etzyona Eisenstein, Dafna Guttman, Tamar Silberg
{"title":"Psychometric properties of the Hebrew KIDSCREEN 52, 27 and 10 items: a cross-sectional study of self and parents reports in youth with and without physical disabilities.","authors":"Sharon Barak, Jana Landa, Etzyona Eisenstein, Dafna Guttman, Tamar Silberg","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03941-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The KIDSCREEN health related quality of life (HRQoL) measures have not been validated in Hebrew and are under-studied in youth with physical disabilities. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Hebrew KIDSCREEN-52, 27, and 10, in self-report and parent versions, among youth with and without physical disabilities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Youth (ages 10-18) with and without physical disabilities, and their parents, completed the KIDSCREEN questionnaires. Disability-related data were collected using the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI), along with psychological evaluations. Internal consistency was measured with Guttman's Lambada, and parent-child concordance using paired t-tests and intraclass correlation (ICC). Convergent validity was assessed with correlations and known group's and discriminative validity were tested by independent t-tests and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFI) was also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study involved 566 child-parent dyads of youth without disabilities and 379 with disabilities, with a mean age of 12.42-13.54 years. Guttman's Lambada was acceptable (≥ 0.7) for all KIDSCREEN subscales. No significant differences were found between self- and parent-reports in the non-disability group, but parents scored lower in the disability group. ICC ranged from 0.5-to-0.90. Convergent validity was confirmed by significant associations between PEDI, psychological health and KIDSCREEN scales. Youth without disabilities reported better HRQoL than those with disabilities. The KIDSCREEN's discriminative ability ranged from very high accuracy in the self-reported KIDSCREEN-52 (AUC = 0.85) to moderate accuracy in the proxy-reported KIDSCREEN-10 (AUC = 0.683). The CFI showed overall good model fit.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Hebrew KIDSCREEN scales show reliability and validity but should be interpreted cautiously due to study limitations. Parent reports should only be primary when self-report isn't possible, as youth with disabilities often differ in their HRQoL evaluations. Youth without physical disabilities reported better HRQoL across multiple dimensions, highlighting the importance of evaluating HRQoL in youth with physical disabilities to address their unique needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03941-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The KIDSCREEN health related quality of life (HRQoL) measures have not been validated in Hebrew and are under-studied in youth with physical disabilities. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Hebrew KIDSCREEN-52, 27, and 10, in self-report and parent versions, among youth with and without physical disabilities.

Methods: Youth (ages 10-18) with and without physical disabilities, and their parents, completed the KIDSCREEN questionnaires. Disability-related data were collected using the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI), along with psychological evaluations. Internal consistency was measured with Guttman's Lambada, and parent-child concordance using paired t-tests and intraclass correlation (ICC). Convergent validity was assessed with correlations and known group's and discriminative validity were tested by independent t-tests and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFI) was also conducted.

Results: This study involved 566 child-parent dyads of youth without disabilities and 379 with disabilities, with a mean age of 12.42-13.54 years. Guttman's Lambada was acceptable (≥ 0.7) for all KIDSCREEN subscales. No significant differences were found between self- and parent-reports in the non-disability group, but parents scored lower in the disability group. ICC ranged from 0.5-to-0.90. Convergent validity was confirmed by significant associations between PEDI, psychological health and KIDSCREEN scales. Youth without disabilities reported better HRQoL than those with disabilities. The KIDSCREEN's discriminative ability ranged from very high accuracy in the self-reported KIDSCREEN-52 (AUC = 0.85) to moderate accuracy in the proxy-reported KIDSCREEN-10 (AUC = 0.683). The CFI showed overall good model fit.

Conclusion: The Hebrew KIDSCREEN scales show reliability and validity but should be interpreted cautiously due to study limitations. Parent reports should only be primary when self-report isn't possible, as youth with disabilities often differ in their HRQoL evaluations. Youth without physical disabilities reported better HRQoL across multiple dimensions, highlighting the importance of evaluating HRQoL in youth with physical disabilities to address their unique needs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
期刊最新文献
Patient experience of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency-associated liver disease: a qualitative study. Psychometric properties of the Hebrew KIDSCREEN 52, 27 and 10 items: a cross-sectional study of self and parents reports in youth with and without physical disabilities. A patient first perspective of sleep disturbance across therapeutic areas: a systematic literature review of qualitative studies. Correction: Understanding the impact of early onset colorectal cancer on quality of life: a qualitative analysis of online forum data. Effect of impairment on health-related quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis: association of functional systems and EQ-5D-5L index values in a cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1