Validation française de questionnaires de participation sociale auprès d'aînés en situation d'incapacités
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: In order to create a full profile of seniors with disabilities it is useful to include an evaluation of their social participation. However, only few questionnaires that take this concept into account are available in French. PURPOSE; The study aimed at translating the Participation Measure for Post-Acute Care (PM-PAC) questionnaire and the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire (IPAQ) followed by an evaluation of their test-retest reliability and their convergent validity by comparing them with the Mesure des habitudes de vie (MHAVIE) questionnaire. METHODOLOGY: Thirty seniors with physical disabilities completed the three questionnaires twice. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability of the total francophone score of the IPAQ version (inter-class correlation coefficient (ICC): 0.86) and of the PM-PAC (CCI: 0.90) is significant. The total participation scores in the three questionnaires are moderately correlated (rs: 0.53 to 0.64). CONSEQUENCES FOR PRACTICAL WORK: The study gives francophone clinical occupational therapists and researchers two valid new tools for evaluating social participation.
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 | 0.058 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".