Validation of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28) on a Sample of At-Risk New Zealand Youth
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
Purpose: This article reports on an examination of the psychometric properties of the 28-item Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28). Methods: Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach’s α, t-tests, correlations, and multivariate analysis of variance were applied to data collected via interviews from 593 at-risk adolescents (12–17 years) to identify the factor structure, internal consistency, test–retest reliability, construct validity, and floor and ceiling effects of the CYRM-28. Results: A four-factor structure was identified comprising two contextual factors, individual and family factors. The CYRM-28 and its factors show good internal reliability, stable test–retest properties, and no floor or ceiling effects. The measure also showed good construct validity. Discussion: The CYRM-28 shows good overall validity on this group of New Zealand youth, and researchers and social workers can have some confidence in its usefulness as a measure that can be used to assess resilience in youth from a range of ethnic backgrounds.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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