Validation of the Brazilian-Portuguese Version of a Short Questionnaire to Assess Knowledge in Cardiovascular Disease Patients (CADE-Q SV)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient education is an essential part of cardiovascular patients' care targeting self-management behavior to reduce risk factors and subsequent events. Herein, a short and reliable tool to assess patients' knowledge in Brazil is warranted. OBJECTIVES: To translate, culturally-adapt and psychometrically validate the Portuguese version of the Coronary Artery Disease Education Questionnaire Short Version (CADE-Q SV). METHODS: The Portuguese CADE-Q SV - translated and culturally-adapted - was reviewed by five bilingual experts in cardiovascular disease. This version was then pre-tested in 21 patients, and clarity of items was checked using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = not clear to 10 = very clear. It was then psychometrically tested in 200 cardiovascular patients (41%women; mean age = 58.4 ± 11.6 years old). The internal consistency was assessed using Kuder-Richardson-20 (KR-20) and Cronbach's alpha, test-retest reliability through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), factor structure using confirmatory factor analysis, and construct validity regarding educational level, family income, and time of diagnosis. RESULTS: All questions were considered clear by patients (clarity range:7.8-9.6). KR-20 was 0.70. All ICC values were > 0.70. Factor analysis revealed 6 factors, all internally consistent. Construct validity was supported by significant differences in total scores by educational level and family income (p < 0.001). The overall mean was 13.08 ± 2.61. The area with the highest knowledge was risk factors and the lowest was psychosocial risk. CONCLUSIONS: The Portuguese CADE-SV was demonstrated to have good validity and reliability. This tool can be applicable in clinical and research settings, assessing cardiovascular patients' knowledge as part of an education programming.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".