MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395069732 · doi:10.1017/s1478951516000316

The needs of siblings of children with a life-threatening illness, part 2: Psychometric validation of the IBesFEMS

2016· article· en· W2395069732 on OpenAlexafffund
Marianne Olivier d'avignon, Serge Dumont, Pierre Valois, S. Robin Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyPsychometricsClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Life-threatening illnesses in children have a significant impact on the lives of their brothers and sisters. Consequently, special attention must be paid to the specific needs of these siblings to help them cope with their situations. To address this issue, we developed an inventory of the needs of the adolescent siblings of severely ill children, the Inventaire des Besoins de la Fratrie d'Enfants Malades Sévèrement (IBesFEMS) [Needs Inventory for Siblings of Critically Ill Children]. The present article describes a preliminary validation study of this new instrument. METHOD: In a prospective cohort study, the 48-item instrument was administered via a website or paper to 58 siblings. RESULTS: Our study revealed that the measure has an estimated internal consistency of 0.96 and a temporal stability intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.86 (p < 0.01). Its convergence validity is also satisfactory. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Our findings suggest that the IBesFEMS is highly relevant for pediatric palliative care clinicians and researchers. Future studies should investigate its factorial structure and predictive validities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative & Supportive CareSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207