145
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of the Web-Based and Digital Questionnaires of the Spanish and Catalan Versions of the KIDSCREEN-52

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The objectives of the study were to develop web-based Spanish and Catalan versions of the KIDSCREEN, and to compare scores and psychometric properties with the paper version.

          Methods

          Internet and paper Spanish and Catalan versions of the KIDSCREEN-52 were included in a cross-sectional study in school-age children. Web-based and paper Spanish or Catalan versions of the KIDSCREEN-52 were administered to students aged 8 to 18 years from primary and secondary schools in Palafolls (Barcelona, Spain, n = 923). All students completed both web-based and paper versions during school time with an interval of at least 2 hours between administrations. The order of administration was randomized. The KIDSCREEN-52, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and sociodemographic variables were collected. Missing values, floor and ceiling effects, and internal consistency were compared between both versions, as well as mean score differences, level of agreement, and known groups and construct validity.

          Results

          Participation rate was 77% (n = 715). Web-based and paper versions showed low percentage of missing values and similar high ceiling effect (range 0 to 44%). Mean score differences showed an effect size (ES) lower than 0.2 in all dimensions. Internal consistency ranged from 0.7 to 0.88, and degree of agreement was excellent (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] range 0.75 to 0.87). Expected differences were seen by sex, age, socioeconomic status and mental health status.

          Conclusions

          The web-based KIDSCREEN-52 showed similar scale score and reliability and validity than the paper version. It will incorporate the child population in the assessment of quality of life providing a more attractive format.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

          In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old. Such investigations are often analysed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is described, together with the relation between this analysis and the assessment of repeatability.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology.

            Surveys of risk behaviors have been hobbled by their reliance on respondents to report accurately about engaging in behaviors that are highly sensitive and may be illegal. An audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (audio-CASI) technology for measuring those behaviors was tested with 1690 respondents in the 1995 National Survey of Adolescent Males. The respondents were randomly assigned to answer questions using either audio-CASI or a more traditional self-administered questionnaire. Estimates of the prevalence of male-male sex, injection drug use, and sexual contact with intravenous drug users were higher by factors of 3 or more when audio-CASI was used. Increased reporting was also found for several other risk behaviors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review.

              Patient-reported outcomes (PROs; self-report assessments) are increasingly important in evaluating medical care and treatment efficacy. Electronic administration of PROs via computer is becoming widespread. This article reviews the literature addressing whether computer-administered tests are equivalent to their paper-and-pencil forms. Meta-analysis was used to synthesize 65 studies that directly assessed the equivalence of computer versus paper versions of PROs used in clinical trials. A total of 46 unique studies, evaluating 278 scales, provided sufficient detail to allow quantitative analysis. Among 233 direct comparisons, the average mean difference between modes averaged 0.2% of the scale range (e.g., 0.02 points on a 10-point scale), and 93% were within +/-5% of the scale range. Among 207 correlation coefficients between paper and computer instruments (typically intraclass correlation coefficients), the average weighted correlation was 0.90; 94% of correlations were at least 0.75. Because the cross-mode correlation (paper vs. computer) is also a test-retest correlation, with potential variation because of retest, we compared it to the within-mode (paper vs. paper) test-retest correlation. In four comparisons that evaluated both, the average cross-mode paper-to-computer correlation was almost identical to the within-mode correlation for readministration of a paper measure (0.88 vs. 0.91). Extensive evidence indicates that paper- and computer-administered PROs are equivalent.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2014
                5 December 2014
                : 9
                : 12
                : e114527
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain
                [2 ]IMIM (Institut Hospital del Mar de Recerca Biomèdica), Barcelona, Spain
                [3 ]Centro de Investigación Epidemiológica en Red (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
                [4 ]Corporació de Salut del Maresme i la Selva, Sant Jaume, 209–217, 08370 Calella, Spain
                [5 ]Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [6 ]Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52 (W29), 20246 Hamburg, Germany
                University of New South Wales, Australia
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: LR NR DRA HR URS. Performed the experiments: LR NR DRA MA FC. Analyzed the data: LR NR DRA. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: LR NR HR URS. Wrote the paper: LR NR DRA MA FC HR URS.

                Article
                PONE-D-14-30049
                10.1371/journal.pone.0114527
                4257677
                25479465
                047ac35a-f629-463c-8264-0907742bafbf
                Copyright @ 2014

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 4 July 2014
                : 23 October 2014
                Page count
                Pages: 13
                Funding
                The study was financed by the Spanish Ministry of Health (contract number PI12/01296). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Psychometrics
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pediatrics
                Child Health
                Social Sciences
                Custom metadata
                The authors confirm that all data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. Data are from the eKIDSCREEN version study whose authors may be contacted at email of corresponding author: lrajmil@ 123456gencat.cat

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article