Trial reportThe patient2020
Using Animation to Self-Report Health: A Randomized Experiment with Children.
Trial report in The patient, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unravelling the Self-Report Versus Proxy-Report Conundrum for Older Aged Care Residents: Findings from a Mixed-Methods Study.The patient · 2024Trial
- The role of parental health and distress in assessing children's health status.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Methods for Conducting Stated Preference Research with Children and Adolescents in Health: A Scoping Review of the Application of Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Child Health Utility-9D (CHU-9D) is the only generic preference-based measure specifically developed to elicit health-related quality of life directly from children aged 7-11 years. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of animation on a touch screen device (tablet) is a better way of collecting health status information from children aged 4-14 years compared to a traditional paper questionnaire. The specific research questions were firstly, do young children (4-7 years) find an animated questionnaire easier to understand; secondly, independent of age, is completion of an animated questionnaire easier for sick children in hospital settings; and thirdly, do children's preferences for the different formats of the questionnaire vary by the age of the child.
methodsUsing a balanced cross-over trial, we administered different formats of the CHU-9D to 221 healthy children in a school setting and 217 children with health problems in a hospital setting. The study tested five versions of the CHU-9D questionnaire: paper text, tablet text, tablet still image, paper image and tablet animation.
resultsOur results indicated that the majority of the children aged 4-7 years found the CHU-9D questions easy to answer independent of the format of the questionnaire administered. Amongst children aged 7-14 with health problems, the format of questionnaire influenced understanding. Children aged 7-11 years found the tablet image and animation formats easier compared to text questionnaires, while the oldest children in hospital found text-based questionnaires easier compared to image and animation.
conclusionChildren in all three age groups preferred animation on a tablet to other methods of assessment. Our results highlight the potential for using an animated preference-based measure to assess the health of children as young as 4 years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31741279What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.