The Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale: A brief bilingual screening tool for identifying feeding problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish the psychometric characteristics of a newly developed, brief bilingual 14-item parent report tool (The Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale [MCH-Feeding Scale]) designed to identify feeding problems in children six months to six years of age. METHODS: To establish construct validity, 198 mothers of children visiting community paediatrician's offices (normative sample) and 174 mothers of children referred to a feeding clinic (clinical sample) completed the scale. Test-retest reliability was obtained by the re-administration of the MCH-Feeding Scale to 25 children in each sample. RESULTS: Excellent construct validity was confirmed when the mean [± SD] scores of the normative and clinical samples were compared (32.65±12.73 versus 60.48±13.04, respectively; P<0.01). Test-retest reliabilities were high for both groups (normative r=0.845, clinical r=0.92). CONCLUSION: The MCH-Feeding Scale can be used by paediatricians and other health care professionals for quick identification of feeding problems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".