Development and psychometric validation of a cystic fibrosis knowledge scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Well-developed and validated measures of cystic fibrosis (CF) knowledge are scarce. The purpose of the present study is to develop and validate a CF knowledge scale that is brief, easy to use, self-administered and demonstrates clinical utility. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search generated a pool of scale items; an expert panel of CF team members reviewed and provided recommendations for item inclusion. A focus group of CF patients and family members (n = 12) then reviewed the items for face validity and reading clarity. To evaluate the validity and reliability of the newly developed CF knowledge scale, it was administered to several different samples including CF patients (n = 45), respirology patients (n = 100), health-care providers (n = 74) and university student samples (psychology students, n = 71; medical students, n = 36). RESULTS: Internal consistency of the scale was high, with an alpha coefficient for the overall sample of .95 (n = 326). The scale also demonstrated excellent construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: This study is an important first step in a line of research that aims to develop and empirically validate a psycho-educational adherence intervention for improving quality of life and treatment outcomes among adult CF patients. The CF knowledge scale has potential applications as a clinical teaching tool with patients and health-care providers and could be used as an outcome measure in CF educational intervention studies aimed at optimizing CF treatment knowledge, adherence and quality of life among CF patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".