The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory: An evaluation of its reliability and validity for children with traumatic brain injury

136Citations
Citations of this article
140Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, version 4.0 (PedsQL), and to compare it with that of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) among children with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design: Prospective cohort study that documented the health-related quality of life of 391 children at 3 and 12 months postinjury. Setting: Four level I pediatric trauma centers. Participants: Children (age range, 5-15y) hospitalized with a TBI or an extremity fracture. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Parent-reported PedsQL and BRIEF scale scores. Results: Both the PedsQL and BRIEF scales showed good internal consistency (PedsQL α range, .74-.93; BRIEF α range, .82-.98) and test-retest reliability (PedsQL r range, .75-.90; BRIEF r range, .82-.92), respectively. Factor analysis revealed that most PedsQL items loaded most highly on their conceptually derived scale. The PedsQL cognitive function scale detected the largest differences among groups of children with varying severities of TBI as well as parents' assessment of change in cognition postinjury. Conclusions: Although the reliability of the 2 instruments is comparable, the PedsQL discriminates better among children with TBI. The PedsQL is a promising instrument for measuring the health of children after TBI. © 2005 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McCarthy, M. L., MacKenzie, E. J., Durbin, D. R., Aitken, M. E., Jaffe, K. M., Paidas, C. N., … Ding, R. (2005). The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory: An evaluation of its reliability and validity for children with traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86(10), 1901–1909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.026

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free