IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0150545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Children’s Quality of Life Based on the KIDSCREEN-27: Child Self-Report, Parent Ratings and Child-Parent Agreement in a Swedish Random Population Sample

Author

Listed:
  • Anne H Berman
  • Bojing Liu
  • Sara Ullman
  • Isabel Jadbäck
  • Karin Engström

Abstract

Background: The KIDSCREEN-27 is a measure of child and adolescent quality of life (QoL), with excellent psychometric properties, available in child-report and parent-rating versions in 38 languages. This study provides child-reported and parent-rated norms for the KIDSCREEN-27 among Swedish 11–16 year-olds, as well as child-parent agreement. Sociodemographic correlates of self-reported wellbeing and parent-rated wellbeing were also measured. Methods: A random population sample consisting of 600 children aged 11–16, 100 per age group and one of their parents (N = 1200), were approached for response to self-reported and parent-rated versions of the KIDSCREEN-27. Parents were also asked about their education, employment status and their own QoL based on the 26-item WHOQOL-Bref. Based on the final sampling pool of 1158 persons, a 34.8% response rate of 403 individuals was obtained, including 175 child-parent pairs, 27 child singleton responders and 26 parent singletons. Gender and age differences for parent ratings and child-reported data were analyzed using t-tests and the Mann-Whitney U-test. Post-hoc Dunn tests were conducted for pairwise comparisons when the p-value for specific subscales was 0.05 or lower. Child-parent agreement was tested item-by-item, using the Prevalence- and Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAK) coefficient for ordinal data (PABAK-OS); dimensional and total score agreement was evaluated based on dichotomous cut-offs for lower well-being, using the PABAK and total, continuous scores were evaluated using Bland-Altman plots. Results: Compared to European norms, Swedish children in this sample scored lower on Physical wellbeing (48.8 SE/49.94 EU) but higher on the other KIDSCREEN-27 dimensions: Psychological wellbeing (53.4/49.77), Parent relations and autonomy (55.1/49.99), Social Support and peers (54.1/49.94) and School (55.8/50.01). Older children self-reported lower wellbeing than younger children. No significant self-reported gender differences occurred and parent ratings showed no gender or age differences. Item-by-item child-parent agreement was slight for 14 items (51.9%), fair for 12 items (44.4%), and less than chance for one item (3.7%), but agreement on all dimensions as well as the total score was substantial according to the PABAK-OS. Visual interpretation of the Bland-Altman plot suggested that when children’s average wellbeing score was lower parents seemed to rate their children as having relatively higher total wellbeing, but as children’s average wellbeing score increased, parents tended to rate their children as having relatively lower total wellbeing. Children living with both parents had higher wellbeing than those who lived with only one parent. Conclusions: Results agreed with European findings that adolescent wellbeing decreases with age but contrasted with some prior Swedish research identifying better wellbeing for boys on all dimensions but Social support and peers. The study suggests the importance of considering children’s own reports and not only parental or other informant ratings. Future research should be conducted at regular intervals and encompass larger samples.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne H Berman & Bojing Liu & Sara Ullman & Isabel Jadbäck & Karin Engström, 2016. "Children’s Quality of Life Based on the KIDSCREEN-27: Child Self-Report, Parent Ratings and Child-Parent Agreement in a Swedish Random Population Sample," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150545
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150545
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150545&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0150545?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rafdzah Zaki & Awang Bulgiba & Roshidi Ismail & Noor Azina Ismail, 2012. "Statistical Methods Used to Test for Agreement of Medical Instruments Measuring Continuous Variables in Method Comparison Studies: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-7, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pedro F Saint-Maurice & Gregory J Welk, 2015. "Validity and Calibration of the Youth Activity Profile," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Q Wang & M Li & Edmond H M Lou & M S Wong, 2015. "Reliability and Validity Study of Clinical Ultrasound Imaging on Lateral Curvature of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Hubert Krysztofiak & Marcel Młyńczak & Łukasz A Małek & Andrzej Folga & Wojciech Braksator, 2019. "Left ventricular mass normalization for body size in children based on an allometrically adjusted ratio is as accurate as normalization based on the centile curves method," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Chinyereugo M Umemneku Chikere & Kevin Wilson & Sara Graziadio & Luke Vale & A Joy Allen, 2019. "Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard – An update," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, October.
    5. Ivan Simko & Ryan J Hayes, 2018. "Accuracy, reliability, and timing of visual evaluations of decay in fresh-cut lettuce," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Kate A Timmins & Kimberley L Edwards, 2016. "Validation of Spatial Microsimulation Models: a Proposal to Adopt the Bland-Altman Method," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 9(2), pages 106-122.
    7. Carlos D. Gómez-Carmona & José Pino-Ortega & Braulio Sánchez-Ureña & Sergio J. Ibáñez & Daniel Rojas-Valverde, 2019. "Accelerometry-Based External Load Indicators in Sport: Too Many Options, Same Practical Outcome?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150545. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.