French Canadian Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire '07: DCDQ-FC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parent-report measures, such as the Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire'07 (DCDQ'07), are used to identify developmental coordination disorder (DCD) in children. Early identification of this condition is important to mitigate its social-emotional and health consequences. Unfortunately, few French-language assessments are available to therapists working with francophone populations. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to undertake a formal translation of the English DCDQ'07 and begin to examine its psychometric properties. METHODS: The translation was done using Beaton, Bombardier, and Guillemin's (2000) guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation. Methodologies described by Haccoun (1987) and Vallerand (1989) were used to address the psychometric qualities of the translation. FINDINGS: The DCDQ'07 and its French translation (DCDQ-FC) are equivalent, with excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Concurrent and construct validity were adequate for a screening measure; however, low sensitivity was obtained with both measures. IMPLICATIONS: The DCDQ-FC is a valid translation for use with a French Canadian population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".