Keywords
Pediatrics ×
Show more Keywords
Table of contents
  1. 1. Clinical Trial
  2. 2. Routine Documentation
  3. 3. Registry/Cohort Study
  4. 4. Quality Assurance
  5. 5. Data Standard
  6. 6. Patient-Reported Outcome
  7. 7. Medical Specialty
Selected data models

You must log in to select data models for download or further analysis.

- 6/25/20 - 1 form, 2 itemgroups, 36 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: Administrative documentation, Child Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (CEBQ)
Wardle, J., Guthrie, C. A., Sanderson, S., & Rapoport, L. (2001). Child Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (CEBQ). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 25.06.2020, from www.midss.ie Key references: Wardle, J., Guthrie, C. A., Sanderson, S., & Rapoport, L. (2001). Development of the children’s eating behaviour questionnaire. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 963-970. Carnell, S., & Wardle, J. (2007). Measuring behavioural susceptibility to obesity: Validation of the child eating behaviour questionnaire. Appetite, 48, 104-113. Primary use / Purpose: The CEBQ is designed to measure eating styles in young children. Background: Research has suggested that individual differences in several aspects of eating style contribute to the development of weight problems in children and adults. The Child Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (CEBQ) was designed to assess children's eating scale styles. It is a parent-report measure comprised of 35 items, each rated on a five-point likert scale that ranges from never to always. It is made up of eight scales: Food responsiveness, Emotional over-eating, Enjoyment of food, Desire to drink, Satiety responsiveness, Slowness in eating, Emotional under-eating, and Food fussiness. The instrument is ideal for use in research investigating the early precursors of eating disorders or obesity. Psychometrics: The psychometric properties of the instrument have been evaluated by Wardle and colleagues (2001) and Carnell and Wardle (2007). Scoring: see https://www.midss.org/content/child-eating-behaviour-questionnaire-cebq (cited 25.06.2020) Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.271
- 6/25/20 - 1 form, 1 itemgroup, 5 items, 1 language
Itemgroup: Satisfaction With Life Scale-Child (SWLS-C)
Gadermann, A. M., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2010). Satisfaction With Life Scale-Child (SWLS-C). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 25.06.2020, from www.midss.ie Key references: Gadermann, A. M., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2010). Investigating validity evidence of the Satisfaction with Life Scale adapted for Children. Social Indicators Research, 96, 229-247. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. Primary use / Purpose: The Satisfacation with Life Scale- Child (SWLS-C) is designed to measure children's judgements of their satisfaction with their life. Background: Gadermann et al. (2010) highlight several reasons why the study of children's life satisfaction is important. These include the development of a greater understanding of children's subjective well-being and its correlates, the monitoring of children's subjective well-being, and for the development of interventions to improve the well-being of children. Gadermann and colleagues (2010) adapted The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), one of the most commonly used measures of life satisfaction in adults, for use with children between the ages of 9 and 14. The wording of the items and the response format was changed to make the scale more understandable for children. The resulting scale contains 5 items, each rated on a five-point likert scale from disagree a lot to agree a lot. Psychometrics: Gadermann et al. (2010) presents support for the psychometric properties of the instrument. SCORING: SWLS-C items are scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (“disagree a lot”) to 5 (“agree a lot”) then added together yielding a total score ranging from 5 to 25. Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.270
- 6/23/20 - 1 form, 2 itemgroups, 46 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: Administrative data, PLEASE CHOOSE THE ANSWER THAT BEST DESCRIBES YOUR CHILD
Ghuman, J. K., Leone, S. L., Lecavalier, L., & Landa, R. J.. (2012). Screen for Social Interaction- Toddler Version (SSI-T). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 23.06.2020 from www.midss.ie Scoring: see www.midss.org/content/screen-social-interaction-toddler-version-ssi-t (cited 23.06.2020) Key references: Ghuman, J. K., Leone, S. L., Lecavalier, L., & Landa, R. J. (2011). The screen for social interaction (SSI): A screening measure for autism spectrum disorders in preschoolers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 2519-2529 Primary use / Purpose: The Ghuman-Folstein Screen for Social Interaction - Toddler Version (SSI-T), is a 26-item measure of social interaction that aims to screen for autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in clinical samples of young high-risk children aged 24-42 months. Background: Current diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is governed by qualitative impairments in social interaction and communication, and the presence of restricted or repetitive behaviors. There are very early signs of social and communication delays that point to risk for ASD. Numerous screening instruments have been designed to detect risk for ASD, but few have centered on very young children. This Screen for Social Interaction- Toddler Version (SSI-T) aims to correct this gap, by assessing toddler aged 24-42 months old for ASD. Psychometrics: Psychometric analysis is presented in Ghuman et al. (2011). Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.219
- 6/23/20 - 1 form, 2 itemgroups, 41 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: Administrative data, PLEASE CHOOSE THE ANSWER THAT BEST DESCRIBES YOUR CHILD
Ghuman, J. K., Leone, S. L., Lecavalier, L., & Landa, R. J.. (2012). Ghuman-Folstein Screen for Social Interaction – Preschool Version (SSI-PS). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 23.06.2020 from www.midss.ie Scoring: see wwww.midss.org/content/ghuman-folstein-screen-social-interaction-–-preschool-version-ssi-ps (cited 23.06.2020) Key references: Ghuman, J. K., Leone, S. L., Lecavalier, L., & Landa, R. J. (2011). The screen for social interaction (SSI): A screening measure for autism spectrum disorders in preschoolers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 2519-2529 Primary use / Purpose: The Ghuman-Folstein Screen for Social Interaction (SSI) for Preschoolers (aged 43-61 months) is a 21-item instrument developed to detect problems with social interactions in young children. Specifically, SSI is a unique parent-administered screening instrument that measures social-communication behaviors in very young children with ASD. It has been postulated as a useful screen to differentiate very young children with substantive social interaction delays associated with ASD from those with non-ASD developmental delays. Background: Key characteristics of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are currently conceptualized as having qualitative impairments in social interaction and communication, and the presence of restricted or repetitive behaviors. There are very early signs of social and communication delays that signal risk for ASD. Numerous screening measures have been advanced to detect risk for ASD, but few have centered on very young children. The Ghuman-Folstien SSI represents a novel and unique measure to bridge this gap. Psychometrics: For psychometric data, consult Ghuman et al. (2011). Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.218
- 6/23/20 - 1 form, 1 itemgroup, 13 items, 1 language
Itemgroup: Thoughts and feelings when you child is in pain
Crombez, Bijttebier, Eccleston, Mascagni, Mertens, Goubert and Verstraeten. (2012). Pain Catastrophizing Scale (parent version). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 23.06.2020 from www.midss.ie Key references: Crombez, G., Bijttebier, P., Eccleston, C., Mascagni, T., Mertens, G., Goubert, L. and Verstraeten, K., (2003). The child version of the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS-C): a preliminary validation. Pain, 104 (3), pp. 639-646. Goubert, L., Eccleston, C., Vervoort, T., Jordan, A. and Crombez, G., (2006). Parental catastrophizing about their child's pain. The parent version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-P): A preliminary validation. Pain, 123 (3), pp. 254-263. Primary use / Purpose: These short likert-type questionnaires assess catastrophising about pain in children and their parents. It looks at issues such as rumination, magnification and feelings of helplessness. Background: Catastrophising about pain has been shown to influence adjustment to pain. Previously, the only measures for this construct were brief subscales of larger measures. The Pain Catastrophizing Scales developed from the measure used in Sullivan (1995) involves 13 items dedicated to overly negative attitudes towards the pain. The impact of pain catastrophizing may range from increasing subjective pain intensity to predicting the child's school attendance and parental depression. Psychometrics: Reliability and validity of the child version is discussed in Crombez, Bijttebier, Eccleston, Mascagni, Mertens, Goubert and Verstraeten (2003) and of the parent version in Goubert, Eccleston, Vervoort, Jordan, and Crombez (2006). Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.212
- 6/21/20 - 1 form, 1 itemgroup, 13 items, 1 language
Itemgroup: Thoughts and feelings during pain
Crombez, Bijttebier, Eccleston, Mascagni, Mertens, Goubert and Verstraeten. (2012). Pain Catastrophizing Scale (child version). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 21.06.2020 from www.midss.ie Key references: Crombez, G., Bijttebier, P., Eccleston, C., Mascagni, T., Mertens, G., Goubert, L. and Verstraeten, K., (2003). The child version of the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS-C): a preliminary validation. Pain, 104 (3), pp. 639-646. Goubert, L., Eccleston, C., Vervoort, T., Jordan, A. and Crombez, G., (2006). Parental catastrophizing about their child's pain. The parent version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-P): A preliminary validation. Pain, 123 (3), pp. 254-263. Primary use / Purpose: These short likert-type questionnaires assess catastrophising about pain in children and their parents. It looks at issues such as rumination, magnification and feelings of helplessness. Background: Catastrophising about pain has been shown to influence adjustment to pain. Previously, the only measures for this construct were brief subscales of larger measures. The Pain Catastrophizing Scales developed from the measure used in Sullivan (1995) involves 13 items dedicated to overly negative attitudes towards the pain. The impact of pain catastrophizing may range from increasing subjective pain intensity to predicting the child's school attendance and parental depression. Psychometrics: Reliability and validity of the child version is discussed in Crombez, Bijttebier, Eccleston, Mascagni, Mertens, Goubert and Verstraeten (2003) and of the parent version in Goubert, Eccleston, Vervoort, Jordan, and Crombez (2006). Digital Object Identifier (DOI): http://dx.doi.org/10.13072/midss.212
- 6/10/20 - 1 form, 1 itemgroup, 11 items, 1 language
Itemgroup: Interval
Thomas L. McKenzie, Ph.D. .(2012). Behaviors of Eating and Activity for Children's Health: Evaluation System (BEACHES). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 06.05.2020 from www.midss.ie Purpose To obtain objective data on children’s at home physical activity and sedentary behaviors and selected environmental (social and physical) variables that may influence these events. Description BEACHES is a direct observation system used to simultaneously record children’s physical activity and sedentary behaviors as well as related environmental characteristics and events. The physical activity codes have been validated using heart rate monitors and accelerometers, and the system can be used in homes, schools, and most settings where children might be found. The original system was developed within the framework of behavioral analysis and included coding for 10 separate dimensions. These dimensions have been modified to relate to the specific aims and study questions of AVENTURAS. The modified version is presented here. Timing BEACHES observations will be conducted on selected cohort children (20%) during one home visit 3 times each measurement year (i.e., 3 total years). Observations will be made at the child’s home on school days between the time the child returns home until the evening meal. Observations will be for 60 minutes, and consist of two-30 minute segments Observation Procedure A trained assessor, paced by voice prompts on an IPOD or MP3, will conduct the observations. Data will be recorded manually on prepared forms or on a PDA. Observation Procedures Home includes both inside and outside the home or apartment complex. Visit homes only on days a parent/guardian confirms the target child will be there for at least 2 hours. BEACHES observations will not be made when the child is away from home (e.g., at a friend’s house or in a park area that is not part of the apartment complex). Observers focus on the target child for a 15-second observation interval and then have 15 seconds to enter data codes onto prepared forms. Voice prompts on an IPOD or MP3 pace the alternating observation and recording periods. Each observe-record cycle requires 30 seconds; thus, a 90-minute period would produce 180 observation intervals. Three dimensions (Child Activity, Location, and People There) are scored using momentary time-sampling methods (i.e., codes are entered to describe events related to these three categories as they occur at the end of the “observe” interval). The other four dimensions (Activity Motivation, Activity Interactor, Views Media, and Eats) are scored using partial-interval time sampling (i.e., events are coded if they occur at any time during the 15-second “observe” interval). Observer Training and Calibration Assessors memorize operational definitions of the behavior dimensions and their subcategories first and then learn the general procedures for recording data. During assessor training videotaped examples and role-playing are used to demonstrate each category. This is followed by live observations at homes. Training for each observer continues until she exceeds an inter-observer agreement score of 80% on two different criterion videotapes, and 80% on two consecutive live observations (using interval-by-interval correspondence, with agreements divided by agreements plus agreements multiplied by 100). Observers are also trained how to interact in order to reduce reactivity. The average training program takes about 16 hours. Throughout the data collection period additional review and training sessions approximately one hour in length will be conducted at least every semester. To ensure maintenance of data quality and to guard against observer drift, observers should be reassessed once every three months through the independent coding of a videotape that has previously been coded by the designers of BEACHES. Any observer scoring below criteria level (80% agreement) should be retrained until mastery is once again achieved. Each observer should complete at least five reliability assessments in the field during each data collection period.
- 5/14/20 - 1 form, 2 itemgroups, 20 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: General Information Section, Statements
- 5/6/20 - 1 form, 2 itemgroups, 10 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: General Information Section, Parent
Michael Scheeringa, MD, MPH. (2012) . Young Child PTSD Screen. Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 06.05.2020 from www.midss.ie SCORING (CUTOFF INDICATING THE NEED FOR CLINICAL ATTENTION) Two symptoms endorsed (either 1 or 2) is considered a positive screen and should be referred for treatment. A child with one only symptom endorsed is marginally positive and should be referred for further testing at a minimum. PURPOSE The YCPS is intended to quickly screen for PTSD in the acute aftermath of traumatic events (2-4 weeks after an event) and/or in settings where there would not be time for longer assessments or more in-depth mental health assessment is not available. The screen is not intended for a general assessment of PTSD or to make a diagnosis. YCPS BACKGROUND The structure of six items was based upon the desire to identify youth who have at least five PTSD symptoms. When young children are diagnosed with a developmentally sensitive algorithm (Scheeringa et al., 2003; Scheeringa, Zeanah, and Cohen, 2010), the average number of symptoms ranges from seven to 10, and clinical intervention trials typically require at least five symptoms for inclusion (Cohen et al., 2004; Scheeringa et al., in press). Of the 17 PTSD symptoms, two of them are rarely if ever endorsed – sense of a foreshortened future and lack of memory for the event. If youth have five of the 15 remaining symptoms, the ratio of endorsed symptoms is one out of three. Thus, the minimal number of symptoms in the screen could be three symptoms but to ensure a margin of confidence it was decided to include six symptoms and require two symptoms to be endorsed for a positive screen. The items were chosen empirically from data on 284 3-6 year old trauma-exposed children in a National Institute of Mental Health-funded study (R01 MH65884-01A1). Only items that occurred in at least 20% of the subjects were used in the process. Avoidance of external reminders was not used for two reasons: (1) distress at reminders was also being tested and if a person has avoidance of reminders they almost always also have distress at reminders. The only differences are in the chronology (avoidance is anticipatory) and severity (avoidance tends to signal greater severity). Having avoidance would be redundant with distress of reminders. (2) Avoidance of reminders is often a difficult item for caregivers to understand and rate accurately (Cohen and Scheeringa, 2009; Scheeringa, in press). This left eight items to consider, which were combined into 15 possible six-item combinations that included distress at reminders as one of the items. Next, the number of children who had at least five PTSD symptoms was calculated (n=165). Then the performance measures of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for all 15 six-item combinations with at least 5 symptoms as the gold standard (Table 1). Table 1 shows that when any combination of two out of six items counted as a “hit”, all of the combinations showed good sensitivity and NPV. However, of the four combinations that showed 100% sensitivity, only one was balanced with three items from criterion B (re-experiencing cluster) and three items from criterion D (increased arousal cluster) (b4b1b2d1d2d5). This would be the favored combination unless another combination had nearly equal sensitivity but superior specificity and PPV. The combination with the highest specificity was the b4b1b2d4d5d3 combination. But it was considered that hypervigilance (d4) would not be well-understood as a checklist item. Furthermore, sensitivity is usually considered relatively more important than specificity for screens because one is trying to identify those who need treatment (as opposed to avoid giving a treatment that can do harm to someone who doesn’t need it). Therefore, the b4b1b2d1d2d5 was considered the best choice because of the highest sensitivity, the best balance among re-experiencing and increased arousal symptoms, and the easiest to understand items for a checklist measure. The YCPS has not been used in a study yet. These wordings are derived from years of experience of conducting interviews and designing diagnostic interviews for PTSD with caregivers of young children in multiple research studies. SCORING EXPLANATION Each item is scored on a 3-point Likert scale. However, the Likert scale was created only for administration purposes to give respondents a range of scores. For scoring, either “yes” answer (any 1 or 2) counts as a “yes”. Two “yes” answers is a positive screen. It was considered that if respondents were given only dichotomous choices to score they may not endorse mild to moderate symptoms. The total sum of scores is irrelevant. LITERATURE CITED Scheeringa MS (2009). Posttraumatic stress disorder. In CH Zeanah (Ed.), Handbook of Infant Mental Health, third edition (pp. 345-361). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Cohen JA, Deblinger E, Mannarino AP, Steer RA (2004). Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 43(4), 393-402. Cohen JA, Scheeringa MS (2009). Post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis in children: Challenges and promises. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience 11(1), 91-99. Scheeringa MS (in press). PTSD in Children Younger Than Age of 13: Towards a Developmentally Sensitive Diagnosis. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma. Scheeringa MS, Weems CF, Cohen JA, Amaya-Jackson L, Guthrie D (2010). Trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder in three through six year-old children: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. Article first published online 14 Dec. 2010. doi: 10.1111/j.1469- 7610.2010.02354.x
- 4/16/20 - 1 form, 8 itemgroups, 70 items, 1 language
Itemgroups: TOUCH/PAIN, Self-regulation – Orientation/Attention/Self-soothing/Sleep, VISION, Self-regulation – Behavior: Irritability, Aggression, Selfinjurious, HEARING, Self-regulation – Toilet Training, TASTE/SMELL, Self-regulation - Digestion
Silva, L. M. T., & Schalock, M. . (2012) . Sense and Self-Regulation Checklist (SSC) . Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved 06.03.2020 from www.midss.ie Key references: Silva, L. M. T., & Schalock, M. (2012). Sense and self-regulation checklist, a measure of comorbid autism symptoms: Initial psychometric evidence. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66, 177-186. Primary use / Purpose: This instrument was designed as a parent/caregiver measure of comorbid symptoms in autism. Background: Comorbid symptoms are common in autism spectrum disorder are associated with increased autism severity. Comorbid symptoms include abnormal sensory responses, sleep disruption, gastrointestinal problems, self-injurious behaviours, aggression, and irritability. It is recommended that comorbid symptoms are identified and treated from the time of autism diagnosis. The SSC was developed following extensive interviews of parents of children with autism about their child's sensory and self-regulatory responses to ordinary, daily-life situations. It contains six sensory subdomains (touch-pain, auditory, visual, taste-smell, hyperreactive to noninjurious stimuli, and hyporeactive to injurious stimuli). Items are rated never (0), rarely (1), sometimes (2), or often (3). Domain scores are obtained by summing the individual items. The SSC has been shown to be a valid measure of sensory and self-regulatory difficulties for children under 6 years of age. It can be used as a treatment outcome measure for children with autism. It can also be used to identify patterns of sensory and self-regulatory of sensory and self-regulatory difficulties in young children with other disabilities. The SSC caregiver report is suitable for use by caregivers who have an elementary school education and is available in English, Spanish, and Chinese. Psychometrics: Acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability has been demonstrated (Silva & Schalock, 2012). Instructions: 1. Write the date, name of your child, and who is completing the checklist. (It is very important that the same parent/caretaker complete the form each time the form is used.) 2. Circle the response for each item that most accurately describes your child. 3. Add all of the numbers circled. 4. Write total into the space provided