Content Validity for a Child Care Self-assessment Tool: Creating Healthy Eating Environments Scale (CHEERS)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this project was to develop and content validate both a formative and summative self-assessment scale designed to measure the nutrition and physical activity environment in community-based child care programs. The study followed a mixed-method modified Ebel procedure. An expert group with qualifications in nutrition, physical activity, and child care were recruited for content validation. The survey was subjected to expert review through digital communication followed by a face-to-face validation meeting. To establish consensus for content validity beyond the standard error of proportion (P < 0.05) the content validity index (CVI) required was ≥0.78. Of the initial 64 items, 44 scored an acceptable CVI for inclusion. The remaining items were discussed, missing concepts identified, and a final CVI employed to determine inclusion. The final tool included 62 items with 5 subscales: food served, healthy eating program planning, healthy eating environment, physical activity environment, and healthy body image environment. Content validation is an integral step in scale development that is often overlooked or poorly carried out. Initial content validity of this scale has been established and will be of value to researchers and practitioners interested in conducting healthy eating interventions in child care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it