AIMS: In this study we evaluated indicators of the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Child Health Questionnaire-Child Form (CHQ-CF). We compared the results in a subgroup of adolescents who completed the standard paper version of the CHQ-CF with the results in another subgroup of adolescents who completed an internet version, i.e., an online, web-based CHQ-CF questionnaire. METHODS: Under supervision at school, 1,071 adolescents were randomized to complete the CHQ-CF and items on chronic conditions by a paper questionnaire or by an internet administered questionnaire. RESULTS: The participation rate was 87%; age range 13-17 years. The internet administration resulted in fewer missing answers. All but one multi-item scale showed internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70). All scales clearly discriminated between adolescents with no, a few, or many self-reported chronic conditions. The paper administration resulted in statistically significant, higher scores on 4 of 10 CHQ-CF scales compared with the internet administration (P < 0.05), but Cohen's effect sizes d were </= 0.21. Mode of administration interacted significantly with age (P < 0.05) on four CHQ-CF scales, but Cohen's effect sizes for these differences were also </= 0.21. CONCLUSION: This study supports the feasibility, internal consistency reliability of the scales, and construct validity of the CHQ-CF administered by either a paper questionnaire or online questionnaire. Given Cohen's suggested guidelines for the interpretation of effect sizes, i.e., 0.20-0.50 indicates a small effect, differences in CHQ-CF scale scores between paper and internet administration can be considered as negligible or small.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raat et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: