French Stigma Scale: French translation and validation of a stigma scale to measure diabetes-related stigma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Context: In recent years internalized stigma, or self-stigma, has been the focus of a number of studies in people living with chronic diseases and mental illness, as it can negatively impact access to care and quality of life. However, few studies have looked at self-stigma experienced by people living with diabetes, specifically among immigrants, a population with a higher risk of stigmatization. Furthermore, the majority of the tools used to measure this type of stigma are only available in English. In order to assess the level of self-stigma among francophone populations living with diabetes, it is imperative to possess a specific French-language tool allowing the measurement of self-stigma in this population. Objective: The aim of this study was to translate and validate a French version of the Self-Stigma Scale-Short (SSS-S), a tool for assessing internalized stigma, in the Canadian immigrant population living with diabetes. Methods: The reliability and validity of the French stigma scale were tested in a sample of 30 immigrant patients living with type 2 diabetes recruited using the volunteer method. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed to assess the factors formulated in the original scale, the SSS-S. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the scale, Cronbach's alpha was used to estimate internal consistency and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess reliability. Results: The total mean score of the scale obtained for the study sample was 16.57 (± 5.10), showing a low level of stigma. Analysis of the scores indicated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86) and excellent reliability (ICC = 0.94) for the full scale. The results of the exploratory factor analysis confirmed the original three-dimensional structure of the SSS-S, despite an unsatisfactory confirmatory factor analysis. (Pr > chi-squared of the base model < 0.05, RMSEA > 0.06, for both models). Conclusion: The French stigma scale is a valid and reliable tool that can be used to assess internalized stigma in patients living with diabetes.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".