MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004070244 · doi:10.4236/ojmp.2015.42006

Reliability and Validity of a French Version of the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory

2015· article· en· W2004070244 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Cadell, Eliana Barrios Suarez, David Hemsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Medical Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic growthDistressPsychologyContext (archaeology)Clinical psychologyReliability (semiconductor)Scale (ratio)Traumatic stressPosttraumatic stressValidityPsychometricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of traumatic stress, the dominant discourse has mainly focused on distress, thus undermining the role that eustress has in traumatic experiences. One of the few exceptions to this has been the research on posttraumatic growth, which has generated much interest since its beginning. There is an increasing interest in posttraumatic growth in various cultures and hence an expansion of the measure, the Post Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), into various languages. This article is the first to perform a rigorous investigation of the psychometric properties of the PTGI, including the scale and subscale reliability, inter-item and subscale correlations, and using a CFA approach. The properties are established with a French translation using two populations of caregivers: those bereaved by HIV/AIDS and parents who are caring for a child with a life-limiting illness. These properties were determined for both the original 21 item scale as well as the shortened version.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations72
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Medical PsychologySame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207