The PedsQL???: Reliability and Validity of the Short-Form Generic Core Scales and Asthma Module
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the reliability and validity of the PedsQL 4.0 SF15, a shortened version of the 23-item PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scales, which is a pediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument, and the PedsQL 3.0 SF22 Asthma Module, a short-form of the PedsQL 3.0 Asthma Module. METHODS: The PedsQL 4.0 SF15 and the PedsQL 3.0 SF22 Asthma Module were administered by telephone to 125 adolescents (aged 12-18) and 338 parents of children with asthma (aged 2-11). Healthy (n = 451) and chronically ill (n = 422) children, matched by age, respondent status, and ethnicity to the asthma sample, provided data for selected validity tests. RESULTS: The Total Score from the PedsQL 4.0 SF15 and the Asthma Symptoms scale and Treatment Problems scale from the PedsQL 3.0 SF22 Asthma Module were sufficiently reliable for group comparisons (alpha > or = 0.70 across all age groups) in the asthma sample. The PedsQL 4.0 SF15 and the PedsQL 3.0 SF22 Asthma Module were able to distinguish between children of different clinical status and correlated as expected with measures of productivity and family functioning in the asthma sample. The psychometric properties of the PedsQL 4.0 SF15 were generally comparable to those of the original instrument. CONCLUSION: The Total Score of the PedsQL 4.0 SF15 and the Asthma Symptoms scale of the PedsQL 3.0 SF22 Asthma Module demonstrated the best reliability and validity and should be suitable for group-level comparisons of generic and asthma-specific HRQoL in clinical research studies of children with asthma.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Short-Form has adequate reliability.
“The Short-Form has adequate reliability [30].”
From Multi-family pediatric pain group therapy: Capturing acceptance and cultivating change (2017) · cites this paper as [30]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 262
- Authors
- Chan, K. S., Mangione-Smith, R., Burwinkle, T. M., Rosen, M., & Varni, J. W.
- Affiliations
- RAND Corporation (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chan, Kitty S.
- Rosen, Mayde
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 256-265
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2082297626
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 23.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
- Keywords
- PedsQL, pediatric health-related quality of life, asthma, psychometric validation, reliability statistics, validity, chronic disease, adolescents, parents of children with asthma, asthma symptoms, treatment challenges
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Asthma, Child, Family Relations, Female, Humans, Male, Parents, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Disclosure, Severity of Illness Index, Cost of Illness, Sickness Impact Profile, Children with Disabilities, Disabled Children
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review