MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Confiabilidade da versão em Português do Inventário de Fobia Social (SPIN) entre adolescentes estudantes do Município do Rio de Janeiro

2004· article· pt· W2104451443 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos de Saúde Pública · 2004
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicStuttering Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it