Portuguese Version of the Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised
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
Abstract. The aim of the present study is to provide validation data regarding the Portuguese version of the Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised in nonclinical individuals. Two studies were undertaken with two different nonclinical samples in order to demonstrate reliability, concurrent, predictive, and construct validity, and in order to establish an appropriate cut-score for nonclinical individuals. A sample of 810 community adults participated in Study 1. Results from this study provided information regarding scale internal consistency, confirmatory factor analysis, and concurrent validity. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis established a cut-off score to be used for screening purposes with nonclinical individuals. A sample of 440 young adults participated in Study 2, which demonstrated scale score internal consistency and 5-month predictive validity. Further, 5-month test-retest reliability was also evaluated and the correlations of SBQ-R scale scores with two other measures that assess constructs related to suicidality, depression and psychache, were also performed. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis was undertaken to demonstrate the robustness of the result obtained in Study 1. Overall, findings supported the psychometric appropriateness of the Portuguese Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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