[The Portuguese version of the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale -- I. Linguistic adaptation, semantic validation, and reliability study].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Toronto Alexithymia Scale, namely in its revised version (TAS-20), is nowadays widely used and certainly the most well validated measure of alexithymia; allowing to recognize three distinct aspects of the construct. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is to assess reliability and validity of a Portuguese translation; proceeding in this first part, to the semantic validation and confirmatory structural analysis of the questionnaire, as well as to the analysis of the internal coherence of this structure, and of its reliability in what concerns time stability. Just to later examine validity related aspects as described in a second paper. METHODS: Fist of all translation and substantiation were properly made as described according with commonly used procedures. Thus resulting in a questionnaire subsequently applied to three distinct populations: university students (N = 468), outpatients attending a routine general practice consultation (N = 50), and patients with inflammatory bowel disease (N = 74). RESULTS: Despite some traceable instability while replicating the original model, confirmatory factorial analysis somehow allowed disclosing the three originally described factors. Nevertheless also resulted some differences susceptible to later being discerned among the factors in what concerns their internal coherence: the questionnaire as a whole is highly reliable, and the same goes for factor 1, in any of the studied samples; less steady results among different groups were found regarding factors 2 and 3. However the test-retest stability brought to evidence, in any of the considered groups, an excellent reliability in all aspects: global score and integrating factors. CONCLUSION: With these sound psychometric properties of the instrument under scrutiny, the observed cross-cultural variations result as minor, while also considering the aimed comparability in the context of a vast amount of alexithymia studies carried out all over the world.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".