Construct Validation and Test–Retest Reliability of a Mealtime Satisfaction Questionnaire for Retirement Home Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mealtime satisfaction is an important component of quality of life (QOL) in residential care, yet there currently is no self-administered tool described in the literature. The purpose of this study is to investigate internal and test-retest reliability, and construct validity of a mealtime satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ) designed for residential care, more specifically retirement homes. A 15-item MSQ was developed and eligible participants from four retirement homes (n = 749) were invited to participate. The participation rate was 24% and the median age was 88 years for respondents. The internal consistency of the MSQ was high (Cronbach Alpha = 0.83) and the test-retest reliability was also high (Intraclass coefficient = 0.91, P < 0.01). The MSQ was associated with a valid and reliable QOL instrument for older adults (Mann Whitney Test = 1595.5, P < 0.01). The MSQ is reliable and is content and construct valid. QOL can be enriched by improving mealtime satisfaction in retirement homes.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".