MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Escala Argentina de Dificultades Alimentarias en Niños (EADAN): Propiedades Psicométricas

2019· article· es· W2981500200 on OpenAlexaff
María Paulina Hauser, Ruth Alejandra Taborda, Alicia Oiberman, Maria Ramsay

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Evaluar · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El objetivo de esta investigación fue adaptar y validar en Argentina un cuestionario para padres que detecta dificultades en la alimentación, las cuales son muy comunes entre los niños pequeños. Se analizaron las propiedades psicométricas de la Escala Argentina de Dificultades Alimentarias en Niños (EADAN) en una muestra argentina de 263 niños de entre los 6 meses y los 6 años 11 meses de edad. Existen diferencias significativas entre la media por ítem y la media del puntaje total en los grupos con dificultades y sin dificultades en la alimentación. La confiabilidad de la escala es buena, con un valor ? = .79. Se realizó un análisis factorial exploratorio que arrojó dos factores que representan el 49.4% de la varianza. Se compararon los puntajes obtenidos por niños prematuros y nacidos a término. Se concluye acerca de la validez del instrumento para la detección de dificultades en la alimentación en niños argentinos.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista EvaluarSame topicChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesFrench-language works237,207