Implementation of OSCE Test to Develop Appropriate Tool to Measure Mothers’ Parenting Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Parents play a vital role throughout a child's life. This role is very significant in the beginning years of a child's life. In this period, the child encounters new experiences and these experiences make him or her to learn and grow. These days, in order to help the parents build a bright future for their children, different parenting programs have been designed. These programs provide a great opportunity for parents to enhance positive parenting skills. The aim of this study was to design a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the mothers' parenting skills. METHODOLOGY: 44 mothers who had children aged 3 - 8 were invited to participate in this study. They took part in parenting-skills training sessions for more than two months. Then they were asked to attend the test center after six months to be tested on trained skills. In this study, mothers' parenting skills were measured by the OSCE test. The reliability of the test was determined with three methods including split half, Cronbach alpha, and correlation between assessors' scores in two similar stations. The construct validity of the test was determined with Explanatory Factor Analysis. RESULTS: The total Cronbach alpha coefficient obtained was 0.83 which indicated that the test had a high internal reliability. The Spearman correlation coefficient obtained for two halves of the test was 0.76. The results of Explanatory Factor Analysis showed that nine stations of OSCE were focused on two factors. The first factor was named positive positions and the second factor was named negative positions. CONCLUSION: The designed OSCE test has the suitable psychometric features to be used by researchers to assess mothers' parenting skills.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".