Confiabilidade da versão em Português do Inventário de Fobia Social (SPIN) entre adolescentes estudantes do Município do Rio de Janeiro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is believed that social phobia has its onset during adolescence and precedes other mental disorders; it is thus important to investigate the condition among young people. To date there is no self-reported scale validated for the Brazilian population. The present study investigated the reliability of the Portuguese-language version of the Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN) among adolescent students from public schools in the city of Rio de Janeiro. After SPIN was translated into Portuguese, a test-retest reliability study was carried out with 190 students. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and weighted kappa (kappaw2) were estimated, log-linear models were fitted, and Bland & Altman graphs were built. The Portuguese version showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.88) and good reliability for total score (ICC=0.78). Reliability for single items was not very good (kappaw2 between 0.32 and 0.65). The "semi-association" model fit most of the items best. Based on these findings we concluded that the Portuguese-language version of SPIN showed good reliability results, similar to those obtained with the original English-language 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 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 | 0.013 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".