Traduction et validation du questionnaire ergothérapique l’Inventaire de l’équilibre de vie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the interest in the concept of life balance, no questionnaire is currently available in French to measure it well. PURPOSE: This study aimed to translate the Life Balance Inventory (Objective 1) and to verify the convergent validity of the French version (Objective 2). METHOD: A cross-cultural validation was first carried out, followed by a cross-sectional descriptive study, with 152 adults ages 40 and over, with and without physical disabilities. Questionnaires were used to measure the following variables, life balance, stress, health, and quality of life. RESULTS: A better life balance is associated with a lower degree of stress (r = -.36; p < .01) as well as higher physical health (r = .42; p = .01), mental health (r = .36; p = .01), and quality of life (r = .54; p < .01). IMPLICATIONS: The French version of the Life Balance Inventory is a valid questionnaire to assist occupational therapists when assessing time use of their clients.
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 | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".