French adaptation of the eating disorder recovery self‐efficacy questionnaire (EDRSQ): Psychometric properties and conceptual overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High prevalence of Eating Disorders (EDs) and poor treatment outcome rates have urged research in the assessment of EDs. Self-efficacy is a key motivational factor in the recovery from EDs. A self-report measure, the Eating Disorder Recovery Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (EDRSQ), was recently developed to assess confidence in adopting healthy eating behaviours and in maintaining a realistic body image. The objectives of this study were to (a) translate the EDRSQ to French (EDRSQ-F), (b) assess the psychometric properties of this French version, and (c) establish normative data for a non-clinical sample. Participants were 203 undergraduate women. They completed the EDRSQ-F and measures of ED symptoms, depression and self-esteem. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed a bi-factorial structure. Both scales demonstrated evidence of reliability and theoretically consistent evidence of construct validity. Findings support the validity of the EDRSQ-F and suggest it is a useful instrument for the assessment of EDs.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".