ArticleDevelopmental medicine and child neurology2025
Psychometric properties of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory - Patient Reported Outcome: A cognitively accessible measure of functional performance.
Article in Developmental medicine and child neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subjective measures of disability in children and adolescents: opportunities, challenges, and implications.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
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
aimTo evaluate the structural validity, internal reliability, and measurement invariance of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory - Patient Reported Outcome (PEDI-PRO), a measure of functional performance of discrete tasks required to participate in everyday life situations important for adulthood.
methodThis was a cross-sectional study with 306 young people aged 14 to 22 years (mean 18 years 10 months, SD 2 years 5 months) with developmental disabilities (43.1% autism spectrum disorder only, 23.9% intellectual disability, 17.6% other disability, 11.4% both autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability, 3.9% missing) completed the PEDI-PRO. Following COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis, applied a Rasch rating-scale model, examined Cronbach's alpha, Rasch person reliability and separation coefficients, and differential item functioning (DIF).
resultsStructural validity was good for the daily activities and mobility domains, and acceptable for the social/cognitive domain. The 3-point Likert response scale functioned as intended. All domains demonstrated acceptable internal consistency on all criteria. One or two items in each domain demonstrated DIF, but the impact on all domain scores was less than 1.0 threshold.
interpretationThe cognitively accessible design and innovative conceptual measurement framework probably contributed to these promising findings. The PEDI-PRO addresses a gap in high-quality patient-reported outcome measures that assess priority outcomes for young people with developmental disabilities.
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.