Validation of the <i>Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 (MPAI-4)</i> and reference norms in a French-Canadian population with traumatic brain injury receiving rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To validate the factor structure and establish internal consistency reliability of the French-Canadian version of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4), using a Canadian sample of adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI) receiving post-acute rehabilitation services. Design Psychometric analysis of prospectively collected French-Canadian MPAI-4 data. Setting Inpatient and outpatient TBI rehabilitation programs. Participants Adults ( N = 1012) with a mild, moderate or severe TBI who received inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation interventions and for whom a first French-Canadian MPAI-4 measure was completed between 2016 and 2020. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure French-Canadian MPAI-4 questionnaire. Results To evaluate the factor structure of the French-Canadian MPAI-4, an exploratory factor analysis using a varimax rotation method was conducted on z-scores for all items. The final and best solution was a three-factor solution, which accounted for 48.68% of the variance. The internal consistency of the French-Canadian MPAI-4 was determined using Cronbach’s alpha and all three subscales showed good internal consistency (all .70 ≤ α ≤ .89). Reference norms for the TBI sample are provided in the form of T scores for subscales and total score, as well as descriptive raw data according to sex, age, TBI severity and rehabilitation setting. Conclusions The three factors extracted using data from the French-Canadian MPAI-4 are similar, but not entirely identical to the three subscales of the original MPAI-4. Overall, the French-Canadian MPAI-4 factor structure is validated. The questionnaire shows good psychometric properties and represents a suitable tool to measure functional evolution and social participation of TBI adults receiving rehabilitation services in a French-Canadian context. The provided reference norms will also help guide the clinical use of the MPAI-4 in French-Canadian TBI populations.
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 | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".