Sintomas vocais na população pediátrica: Validação da versão brasileira do Questionário de Sintomas Vocais Pediátrico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To validate the Pediatric Vocal Symptoms Questionnaire (PVSQ) for Brazilian Portuguese. METHODS: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee (758,309). A total of 716 individuals participated in this research, of which 367 were children and adolescents, with and without vocal alteration, aged 6-18 years, and 349 were parents/guardians, who responded to the final version of the instrument. Among the interviewed of this version, 272 participated in the test-retest, and 32, of the sensitivity. Children and adolescents aged 6-18 years responded to the self-evaluation version of the PVSQ, and their parents/guardians to its parental version. RESULTS: The PVSQ showed acceptable reliability and reproducibility for the Brazilian population and sensitivity to vocal treatment. CONCLUSION: The PVSQ was validated for Brazilian Portuguese, being a good instrument of vocal self-evaluation, both in the parental version and in the self-evaluation version.
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 | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".