Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33777706›Full record

ArticleInternet interventions2021

Co-design and qualitative validation of animated assessment item content for a child-reported digital distress screener.

Kirsty Zieschank, Jamin Day, Michael J Ireland, Sonja March

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internet interventions, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kirsty ZieschankSchool of Psychology and Counselling and Centre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Campus, PO Box 4196, Springfield Central, Queensland 4300, Australia.
Jamin DayFamily Action Centre, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Michael J IrelandSchool of Psychology and Counselling and Centre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Campus, PO Box 4196, Springfield Central, Queensland 4300, Australia.
Sonja MarchSchool of Psychology and Counselling and Centre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Campus, PO Box 4196, Springfield Central, Queensland 4300, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe

methodsThe participants (

resultsTwenty-two out of 30 (73%) items met ≥80% satisfaction and accuracy consensus in their original format, six items (20%) required one round of refinement before meeting consensus, and two items (7%) required two rounds of refinements. Combined acceptability of animated items was high, ranging from 4.1 to 5 out of 5 across all items.

conclusionParticipants were able to accurately identify and understand socio-emotional and behavioural constructs when depicted as animated items. Acceptability was high, even in first iterations when accuracy of understanding required refinement. This study highlighted the importance and benefits of iterative participatory design methodology in ensuring assessment items developed for children are understood, accepted and likely to be effective in obtaining accurate self-report.

Indexed as

AnimationChild codesignDigital screenerIterative development

Identifiers

PMID33777706
PMCPMC7985717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.