Measuring the quality of life of people with life-threatening illnesses: the internal structure of the Polish adaptation of the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire – Revised
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY: revised the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire and improved its psychometric properties and length. The aim of the present study was to adapt the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire - Revised (MQOL-R) into Polish. The study assessed the factorial structure, reliability, and validity of the Polish adaptation of the MQOL-R. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study had a non-randomised, cross-sectional design. The Polish translation of the MQOL-R was administered to 140 people with life-threatening illnesses. Patients were recruited from acute and palliative care units. Data were analysed using confirmatory factor analysis, and correlational and multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: The results provide support for the measurement structure of the Polish adaptation of the MQOL-R. Both the overall scale and four subscales have satisfactory internal consistency and the construct and concurrent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The Polish MQOL-R is psychometrically sound and may serve as a valuable asset in research on quality of life of people with life-threatening illnesses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".