MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797485250 · doi:10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0081

Construction of a biological rhythm assessment scale for children

2018· article· en· W2797485250 on OpenAlexaff
Thierry Berny, Karen Jansen, Taiane de Azevedo Cardoso, Thaíse Campos Mondin, Ricardo Azevedo da Silva, Luciano Dias de Mattos Souza, Cristian Zeni, Flávio Kapczinski, Vera Lúcia Marques de Figueiredo

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do SulConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsExploratory factor analysisMoodRhythmPsychologyAlertnessScale (ratio)Reliability (semiconductor)Clinical psychologyPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Biological rhythm is associated with the level of alertness, cognitive performance and mood of the individuals. Its regularity is essential to preserve good health and quality of life. Objective To present the steps for the construction of the scale entitled Biological Rhythm Interview of Assessment in Neuropsychiatry - Kids (BRIAN-K), designed to measure biological rhythm disruptions in Brazilian children and adolescents. Methods Items were developed following the adult version of the scale. Analysis of the psychometric characteristics of the scale was based on the responses of 373 parents/caregivers of school age children (7 and 8 years old). Results A theoretical model of 17 items with the purpose of evaluating four domains (sleep, activities, social rhythm and eating pattern) was determined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and via identification of a general factor. The psychometric properties of the BRIAN-K showed favorable properties. Conclusion Only two items needed to be rewritten. Further studies are needed to investigate the instrument's adequacy to different age groups and additional evidence of validity and reliability.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Psychiatry and PsychotherapySame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207