Evidence Hub

Determinants of health-related quality of life in healthy children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from a prospective longitudinal cohort study

Sarah R. Haile, G. Peralta, A. Raineri, S. Rueegg, A. Ulytė, M. Puhan, T. Radtke, S. Kriemler

European Journal of Pediatrics, 2024

1,843 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Understanding health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in children and adolescents, during a pandemic and afterwards, aids in understanding how circumstances in their lives impact their well-being. We aimed to identify determinants of HRQOL from a broad range of biological, psychological, and social factors in a large longitudinal population-based sample. Data was taken from a longitudinal sample (n = 1843) of children and adolescents enrolled in the prospective school-based cohort study Ciao Corona in Switzerland. The primary outcome was HRQOL, assessed using the KINDL total score and its subscales (each from 0, worst, to 100, best). Potential determinants, including biological (physical activity, screen time, sleep, etc.), psychological (sadness, anxiousness, stress), and social (nationality, parents’ education, etc.) factors, were assessed in 2020 and 2021 and HRQOL in 2022. Determinants were identified in a data-driven manner using recursive partitioning to define homogeneous subgroups, stratified by school level. Median KINDL total score in the empirically identified subgroups ranged from 68 to 83 in primary school children and from 69 to 82 in adolescents in secondary school. The psychological factors sadness, anxiousness, and stress in 2021 were identified as the most important determinants of HRQOL in both primary and secondary school children. Other factors, such as physical activity, screen time, chronic health conditions, or nationality, were determinants only in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,843 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free