ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2023
Establishment of a condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for children born with esophageal atresia aged 2-7 across 14 countries.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disease-specific quality of life after thoracoscopic repair of esophageal atresia: a single-centre cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Long-term impact of anastomotic leakage following esophageal atresia repair: feeding outcomes, esophageal morbidity, and reinterventions.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of feeding difficulties in children with delayed reconstruction of esophageal atresia: a Swedish nationwide study.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Navigating global collaboration: challenges faced by the international network on esophageal atresia.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Article
- Disease-specific quality of life as part of the long-term follow-up for children born with esophageal atresia in an academic unit in South Africa-a pilot study.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024Article
- Linguistic, Content and Face Validity of the Swedish Version of a Quality-of-Life Assessment for Children, Teenagers and Adults with Spina Bifida.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- A Narrative Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Their Application in Recent Pediatric Surgical Research: Advancing Knowledge and Offering New Perspectives to the Field.European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie · 2024Review
- An International Collaborative Initiative to Establish a Quality-of-Life Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents with Repair of Esophageal Atresia in 14 Countries.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Health-related quality of life in children after surgical repair of esophageal atresia: a cross-sectional study in China.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Esophageal atresia (EA) is a rare congenital anomaly characterized by a discontinuity of the esophagus. Following surgical repair, survival rates have improved dramatically the past decenniums and today exceed 90%, but the children commonly present with esophageal and respiratory morbidity. In 2018, a condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for children with esophageal atresia (EA) aged 2-7 in Sweden-Germany was finalized (The EA-QOL questionnaire). The study aim was to describe the evaluation of the new translations across 12 new countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, Central-and North America. Methods: Following forward-backward translation into the new languages, the 17-item EA-QOL questionnaire was tested in cognitive debriefing interviews with parents of children with EA aged 2-7. Parents rated if each item was easy to understand (clarity) and sensitive to answer (interference with personal integrity). They could skip responding to a non-applicable/problematic item and give open comments. Predefined psychometric criteria were used; item clarity ≥80%/item sensitive to answer ≤20%/item feasibility ≤5% missing item responses. The decision to modify the translation was based on native expert, patient stakeholder, and instrument developer review, and the need for harmonization between translations. Results: Similar to findings in the Swedish-German cognitive debriefing, the cross-cultural analysis of input from 116 parents from 12 new countries (4-14 parents, median 9 parents/country) showed that all items in the EA-QOL questionnaire fulfilled the criteria for item clarity ≥80% and sensitive to answer (ranging from 1%-4.5%), although results varied between countries. Four items had missing responses between 5.2% and 13.4%, three within the same domain and were in line with parents' explanations. Poor translations and feasibility were improved. Conclusions: Based on parent input, the collaboration between native experts, patient stakeholders, and instrument developers, a linguistic version of the EA-QOL questionnaire for children aged 2-7 for use in and across 14 countries has been established. These efforts have set the conditions for a cross-cultural field test of the EA-QOL questionnaire and will open the doors for a new chapter in outcome research, registries, and clinical practice concerning children with EA. In the long-term, this will help increase knowledge of the disease's burden, promote patient-centeredness, exchange of information between nations, and strengthen evidence-based treatments for children born with EA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.