Premium
Development of a questionnaire to collect public health data for school entrants in London: Child Health Assessment at School Entry (CHASE) project
Author(s) -
Edmunds S.,
Haines L.,
Blair M.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
child: care, health and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.832
H-Index - 82
eISSN - 1365-2214
pISSN - 0305-1862
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2005.00460.x
Subject(s) - medicine , ethnic group , inclusion (mineral) , delphi method , mental health , quality of life (healthcare) , family medicine , psychology , nursing , psychiatry , social psychology , statistics , mathematics , sociology , anthropology
Abstract Background To develop a multiprofessional consensus about the relative contributions of the components of children's health and well‐being and to develop a questionnaire that can be used to assess these in London's children. Methods Semi‐structured interviews with health, education and social services professionals were used to identify areas to include in the questionnaire. These ideas were used as the basis for a wider Delphi consultation, with 79 experts in the area of child health. Round 1 of the Delphi asked panellists to rate 54 items as to whether they should be included in the questionnaire or not. Responses were divided into four categories: item to be included measurement method agreed, item to be included measurement method not agreed, no consensus, or excluded. In round 2, consensus was sought for the categories where there was none following round 1. Results Themes identified by the interviews were: economic factors, ethnicity, environment, nutrition, hygiene and physical activity, growth, suffers from chronic/serious illness, development, disability and learning, accidents and hospital attendances, self‐regulation, psychological well‐being, significant life events. After Delphi round 1, items included, where quality measurement method was agreed, were: deprivation index (from postcode), child's ethnicity, temporary accommodation, care status, registered with general practitioner, dental visits, height, weight, special educational needs status, baseline educational assessment result, immunization status, visual and hearing function. Following round 2, items relating to chronic illness, mental health, physical functioning, general health, self‐esteem, family cohesion and accident status were agreed for inclusion with a measurement method also agreed. The questionnaire was acceptable to parents. Conclusion The validity, reliability and feasibility of this questionnaire must now be examined. This data set, if collected across London, would substantially increase the public health data available and allow trends in health to be monitored.