Factors Affecting Korean Neonatal Infant Pain Care: Translation and Validation of Three Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to translate three English-language instruments-Pain Knowledge and Use (PKU), Collaboration and Satisfaction About Care Decisions (CSACD), and Environmental Complexity Scale (ECS)-into Korean and evaluate the equivalence of the instrument versions. Three Korean translators and two senior reviewers translated the instruments' 56 items using a committee approach. Eight Korean experts evaluated the cultural relevance of the translated instruments using a content validity index (CVI), and 12 Korean neonatal nurses were interviewed to assess their understanding of items. In an expert panel review, the item-CVI was less than 0.78 for 14 items. Based on cognitive interviews, four items were found to be unsuitable in Korea. Based on expert panel review and cognitive interviews, unsuitable items were modified or deleted. In another expert panel review, the scale-CVI was 1.00 for the final instruments. The findings support the validity of the Korean-language PKU, CSACD, and ECS for research application.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".