IMPACT OF MODE OF ADMINISTRATION ON INTRA-RATER AGREEMENT OF HEALTH SCORE AND MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES OF PEDIATRIC HRQOL MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS: A SCOPING REVIEW
Author(s)
Abraham G. Welie, MSc, PhD1, Elly Stolk, PhD2, Brittany Humphries, BA, MSc, PhD3, Mike Herdman, MSC4, Laura Duncan, PhD5, Feng Xie, PhD6.
1Student, Mekelle University, Mekelle, Ethiopia, 2Euroqol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 3McMaster University, Kanata, ON, Canada, 4Insight Consulting and Research, Barcelona, Spain, 5McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, 6McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, ON, Canada.
1Student, Mekelle University, Mekelle, Ethiopia, 2Euroqol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 3McMaster University, Kanata, ON, Canada, 4Insight Consulting and Research, Barcelona, Spain, 5McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, 6McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, ON, Canada.
OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aimed to map and characterize the available evidence on HRQoL score intra-rater agreement and measurement properties of different mode of administration (MoAs) of pediatric HRQoL questionnaires.
METHODS: The scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. A comprehensive search of eight databases was conducted from inception up to August 30, 2025. The search terms combined concepts of pediatric instruments, HRQoL, intra-rater agreement, measurement properties, and MoAs. Studies completed only by proxies or assessed by single MoA were excluded. Following PRISMA guidelines, two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data using Covidence. The scoping review protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework(OFS).
RESULTS: A total of 1,205 papers were screened, and seventeen studies were included. Most studies conducted in in Europe (N=12, 70%), North America (N=4, 23%). The most frequently used instrument was PedsQL 4.0 (n = 4, 23%), followed by EQ-5D-Y-3L, SDQ, and KIDSCREEN (each n= 2, 12%). Eleven (65%) studies assessed agreement between MoAs. Nine studies (53%) did not assess feasibility, five (29%) did not report any agreement statistics, and eight (47%) did not report either validity or reliability. None of the studies included assessed responsiveness. Intra-rater agreement in HRQoL and measurement properties between MoAs remain under-evaluated, with few head- to-head MoA comparisons existing. Agreement (n = 14, 82%) and reliability (n = 13, 76%) were most commonly assessed, while feasibility (n = 9, 53%) and validity (n = 8, 47%) were less frequently reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on intra-rater agreement between MoAs and their impact on the psychometric performance of pediatric HRQoL instruments remains limited. This review highlights important variability in how MoAs measurement properties are evaluated and reported, underscoring gaps in methodological consistency across studies.
METHODS: The scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. A comprehensive search of eight databases was conducted from inception up to August 30, 2025. The search terms combined concepts of pediatric instruments, HRQoL, intra-rater agreement, measurement properties, and MoAs. Studies completed only by proxies or assessed by single MoA were excluded. Following PRISMA guidelines, two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data using Covidence. The scoping review protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework(OFS).
RESULTS: A total of 1,205 papers were screened, and seventeen studies were included. Most studies conducted in in Europe (N=12, 70%), North America (N=4, 23%). The most frequently used instrument was PedsQL 4.0 (n = 4, 23%), followed by EQ-5D-Y-3L, SDQ, and KIDSCREEN (each n= 2, 12%). Eleven (65%) studies assessed agreement between MoAs. Nine studies (53%) did not assess feasibility, five (29%) did not report any agreement statistics, and eight (47%) did not report either validity or reliability. None of the studies included assessed responsiveness. Intra-rater agreement in HRQoL and measurement properties between MoAs remain under-evaluated, with few head- to-head MoA comparisons existing. Agreement (n = 14, 82%) and reliability (n = 13, 76%) were most commonly assessed, while feasibility (n = 9, 53%) and validity (n = 8, 47%) were less frequently reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on intra-rater agreement between MoAs and their impact on the psychometric performance of pediatric HRQoL instruments remains limited. This review highlights important variability in how MoAs measurement properties are evaluated and reported, underscoring gaps in methodological consistency across studies.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
PCR96
Topic
Health Technology Assessment, Methodological & Statistical Research, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Health State Utilities, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas