Structure Factorielle et Cohérence Interne de l'Échelle De Mesure du Sentiment D'efficacité Personnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Self-efficacy with regard to work capacity is one of the determinants of return to work among workers with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). To our knowledge, the self-administered questionnaire named Echelle de mesure du sentiment d'efficacité personnelle is the only work-specific scale available in French; however its psychometric properties have not been extensively studied. PURPOSE: To estimate the internal consistency and factorial structure of the scale. METHODS: The questionnaire has been administered to 36 workers in prolonged work disability due to a musculoskeletal injury during the chronic pain phase. RESULTS: Internal consistency is satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha: 0.925). Factor analysis reveals a one-dimensional structure that explains 65.5% of the variance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The results support the use of the scale for clinical practice and research. However, the evaluation of self-efficacy concerning work capacity still requires triangulation with other observations to increase conclusion accuracy.
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 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".