MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800066456 · doi:10.20453/reh.v28i1.3279

Traducción y adaptación de la versión al español del Questionnaire on Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviors related to Oral Health (QKAB-OH)

2018· article· es· W2800066456 on OpenAlexaff
Dave A. Bergeron, Raimunda Ccoyo, Jarin Neftali Ricalde, Palmira La Riva, Lise R. Talbot, Isabelle Gaboury

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Estomatológica Herediana · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivos: Efectuar la traducción y la adaptación transcultural al español del Questionnaire on Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviors related to Oral Health (QKAB-OH) y estudiar la coherencia interna de esta versión del cuestionario. Material y métodos: El proceso de traducción, adaptación y validación del QKAB-OH se realizó en base a la síntesis de varias líneas directrices relacionadas con el proceso de traducción y adaptación de cuestionarios.La coherencia interna de la versión traducida de este cuestionario se evaluó mediante una muestra no probabilística de niños de 9 a 13 años que viven en distritos o comunidades rurales andinas. Resultados: La coherencia interna se evaluó mediante una muestra de 70 niños. Para el conjunto de las secciones de la versión al español del QKAB-OH, el alfa de Cronbach es de 0,73. Conclusiones: Este proceso proporciona validez al contenido del cuestionario y una coherencia interna satisfactoria. Puede utilizarse para evaluar los comportamientos, las actitudes y los conocimientos relacionados con la salud bucodental de los niños peruanos (9 a 13 años) que viven en el área rural alto andino.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Estomatológica HeredianaSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207