Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42463564›Full record

Observational studyJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026

Can parents reliably report burn scar quality on behalf of their child? A clinimetric observational study of child-proxy agreement on the pediatric patient scale of the POSAS.

Frederique M Kemme, Mieke Anthonissen, Annebeth Meij-de Vries, Pien Lelifeld, Thibau Demarbaix, Paul P M van Zuijlen, Anouk Pijpe

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Frederique M KemmeAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands. f.m.kemme@amsterdamumc.nl.
Mieke AnthonissenOSCARE, Organisation for Burns, Scar After-Care and Research, Antwerp, Belgium.
Annebeth Meij-de VriesAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands.
Pien LelifeldAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands.
Thibau DemarbaixOSCARE, Organisation for Burns, Scar After-Care and Research, Antwerp, Belgium.
Paul P M van ZuijlenAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands.
Anouk PijpeAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands. apijpe@rkz.nl.

Funding

Nederlandse Brandwonden Stichting 22.102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe assessment of scar quality is an essential component of follow-up care and outcome evaluation in pediatric burn patients. The pediatric patient scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a recently developed patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for this purpose. In pediatric care, proxy reports are commonly used when children are too young to self-report. However, the extent to which proxy reports reflect children's own perception of scar quality is unclear. This study evaluated child-proxy agreement on the pediatric patient scale of the POSAS. METHODOLOGY: In this clinimetric observational study, children aged 8-17 years with burn scars and their proxies (parent or other caregivers) were recruited at the Burn Center in Beverwijk, The Netherlands, and aftercare center OSCARE in Antwerp, Belgium. Both the child and a proxy independently completed the pediatric patient scale of the POSAS, with proxies instructed to report from the child's perspective (proxy-patient perspective). Child and proxy item scores were described using medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Effect sizes were calculated to quantify the magnitude of differences. Agreement was examined at two levels: (1) presence or absence of complaints and (2) severity ratings. Subgroup analyses were performed for age category and proxy type.

resultsA total of 81 child-proxy pairs were included between January and April 2025. Agreement on item level ranged from fair to substantial (kappa 0.309-0.692) and was moderate for most items. Overall agreement on the presence or absence of complaints was high (mean 78% concordance across items). Proxies reported worse scores than children for color, bumpiness, thickness, tightness, and lines, whereas children reported worse scores for hair growth (p < 0.05). Differences were generally small (≤1 response category). Agreement did not significantly differ across age groups or proxy type.

conclusionsIn general, parents can report the presence or absence of their child's scar complaints and can provide an indication of the severity of the complaint. Proxy reports can meaningfully contribute to scar assessment in pediatric burn care and research when self-report is not possible. The decision to use proxy reports should be guided by the intended purpose of measurement.

Indexed as

BurnsCicatrixParentsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProxyAdolescentBelgiumChildFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsReproducibility of ResultsBurn scarsInter-rater reliabilityPediatricPOSASPROMProxyProxy vs patientScar quality

Identifiers

PMID42463564
PMCPMC13658675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.