Psychometric Testing of Two Chinese-Version Scales on Attitudes Toward and Caregiving Behaviors for End-of-Life Patients and Families
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
The study purpose was to examine the validities and reliabilities of the Chinese-versions Frommelt Attitudes Toward Care of the Dying Scale (Attitudes Scale) and Caregiving Behaviors Scale for End-of-Life Patients and Families (Behaviors Scale). The scales were tested in a convenience sample of 318 nurses with ≥6 months work experience at three hospitals. Cronbach's alphas of the Attitudes and Behaviors Scales were .90 and .96, respectively. Each scale had Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index >.85 and Bartlett's test of sphericity >4000 ( p < .001). Attitudes Scale loaded on three factors: respecting and caring for dying patients and families, avoiding care of the dying, and involving patients and families in end-of-life care. The Behaviors Scale loaded on two factors: supporting dying patients and families, and helping families cope with grief. Factor loadings for both scales were ≥.49. Both Attitudes and Behaviors Scales are reliable and valid for evaluating nurses' attitudes and caregiving behaviors for the dying.
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 | 0.001 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it