ArticleBMC public health2025
Development and assessment of the health-related quality of life scale for children with hearing loss in China.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictors of Rehabilitation Outcomes Following Pediatric Cochlear Implantation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Pediatric hearing loss in the universal newborn hearing screening era: etiologies, risk indicators, and clinical phenotypes.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHearing loss significantly affects children's lives; however, the health-related quality of life (QoL) of children with this disability is not well measured. We sought to develop a reliable and valid measure of health-related QoL in children with hearing loss.
methodsWe constructed a conceptual framework to assess the QoL of children with hearing loss based on the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ Version 4.0 child quality of life scale and World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Version disability general version. The item pool was generated through two rounds of the Delphi method and subsequent group discussions. Subsequently, both a pre-survey and a formal survey were administered across eight hospitals and nine special education schools located in Shanxi and Hebei Province, China. The process of selecting items was grounded in classical test theory and item response theory. Ultimately, we assessed the reliability and validity of the QoL Scale designed for children with hearing loss in China.x`
resultsThe final health-related QoL scale for children with hearing loss (HRQOL-CHL) included 37 items, 6 domains, and 8 subdomains. Reliability assessment encompassed Cronbach's alpha coefficient, split-half reliability, and retest reliability measures. Specifically, for the entire scale, Cronbach's alpha yielded a coefficient of 0.755, binary reliability of 0.796, and retest reliability of 0. 931. The validity findings indicated that the scale performed as anticipated. Both exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that this multidimensional scale was well-suited for assessing children with hearing loss, demonstrating a superior fit.
conclusionsThe HRQOL-CHL exhibits positive reliability, validity, and feasibility, which makes it an efficient QoL assessment tool for children with hearing loss in China.
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.