MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factor analysis of the French version of the shorter 12‐item Perception of Aggression Scale (POAS) and of a new modified version of the Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS)

2012· article· en· W1826387330 on OpenAlexaffabout
Luigi De Benedictis, Alexandre Dumais, Marie-Christine Stafford, Gilles Côté, Alain Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionDysfunctional familyPsychiatryScale (ratio)Clinical psychologyInjury preventionPerceptionHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accessible summary Staff attitudes to violence by psychiatric patients may have an impact on the therapeutic relationship. The French versions of the Perception of Aggression Scale and of a new Modified version of the Overt Aggression Scale are two useful tools for evaluating the subjective experience of and attitudes towards inpatient violence. Future study on the management of inpatient violence may use the French version of these scales to evaluate and monitor psychiatric staff attitudes towards violence and subjective experience of the frequency of inpatient violence. Abstract Psychiatric staff perceptions of aggression by psychiatric patients may affect the therapeutic relationship between care providers and patients in institutions. Attitudes to and the subjective experience of violence may also differ substantially between members of a single care team. This study seeks to validate the French versions of scales of staff attitudes to and subjective experience of institutional violence: a new, modified version of the Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) to measure the subjective perception of the frequency of aggression in the ward; and the Perception of Aggression Scale (POAS) to assess attitudes to the expression of violence by psychiatric patients. Frontline staff (n= 362) from eight French‐language psychiatric institutions in the province of Quebec were surveyed. Factor analyses were performed to determine the validity of the French‐language MOAS and POAS. As expected, a four‐factor structure emerged for the MOAS. For the 12‐item POAS, a three‐factor structure was found: (1) ‘Aggression as a dysfunctional/undesirable phenomenon’; (2) ‘Aggression as a positive expression’; and (3) ‘Aggression as a protective measure’. This study supports use of the French MOAS and POAS in assessing staff attitudes to and subjective experience of aggression in future projects to explore the perception and management of inpatient violence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207