Transcultural adaptation of the Injustice Experience Questionnaire into Brazilian Portuguese
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been proposed that some individuals with musculoskeletal pain may perceive themselves as victims of injustice. Perception of injustice can have a significant impact on several pain-related outcomes, major depressive symptoms, disabilities, and absenteeism. The objective of this study consisted of a transcultural adaptation of the original instrument in English, Injustice Experience Questionnaire into a final version to be used in Brazil. METHODS: The whole translation process consisted of translation, back-translation and the review by a committee of experts. The pre-test was applied to 90 participants (41 participants with chronic musculoskeletal pain). For the psychometric analysis, the translated version was applied to 120 participants with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The internal consistency was verified by the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, and the construct validity was analyzed using factorial exploratory analysis. RESULTS: After the conclusion of the pre-test, there were no difficulties in understanding the translated questionnaire by more than 20% of the sample. The Cronbach alpha calculation for the 12 items of the Injustice Experience Questionnaire/Port-BR was 0.86 [CI (95%) = 0.83 to 0.90; p<0.001]. CONCLUSION: The questionnaire’s Portuguese version proved to be easily understandable showing good semantic validation. Nevertheless, further studies should address other psychometric characteristics of this instrument.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".