MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950605382 · doi:10.5430/ijh.v5n2p36

Parental management of developmental coordination disorder: Validation of a French translation of the Parental Knowledge and Skills Questionnaire

2019· article· en· W2950605382 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gabrielle Pratte, Tibor Schuster, Jade Berbari, Chantal Camden

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Healthcare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Consistency (knowledge bases)Confirmatory factor analysisDevelopmental psychologyPsychological interventionPerceptionClinical psychologyStructural equation modelingComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Best practices in Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) recommend building parental capacities to enhance children’s functioning but few outcome measures are available to document the impact of such interventions. The Parent Knowledge and Skills Questionnaire (PKSQ) is a valid instrument currently only available in English evaluating parental perception of their ability to manage their child, understand DCD’s impact and use knowledge about DCD. The aim of the study was to translate the PKSQ in French and assess the factor structure consistency between the French and English versions.Methods: PKSQ was translated in French using a back-translation method. Parents of children with DCD were recruited in collaboration with the DCD association and rehabilitation centers. Parents completed the questionnaire online (n = 99). Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted based on the questionnaire response data and estimated item-domain correlations were compared with the English version.Results: All items of the original PKSQ were culturally appropriate in the Quebec French context and were thus included in the final version (n = 22). The French questionnaire version showed overall good consistency with the English version. The frequency of statistically inferior item-domain correlations was consistent with the expected rate of 5% under the no difference assumption (3/22, 95% confidence interval: 3% to 35%). Items showed moderate to large correlations with their underlying construct (estimated item-domain correlations between 0.45-0.91).Conclusions: Results suggest the French version of the PKSQ is consistent with the 3-factor structure of the English version, and may now be used to evaluate interventions based on DCD best practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of HealthcareSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207