Validación del instrumento Informed Choice para medir la decisión informada de mamografía en mujeres chilenas usuarias de atención primaria
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptar y validar el instrumento Informed Choice (IC) para la decisión de mamografía al contexto chileno. Estudio transversal, analítico, de adaptación y validación psicométrica. Centro de atención primaria del sector sur oriente de Santiago de Chile. 1) traducir y contra-traducir IC; 2) realizar un grupo focal para la relevancia cultural/lingüística; 3) examinar la validez del contenido; 4) pilotar el instrumento; 5) aplicar para validación. Para la consistencia interna se usó el alfa de Cronbach, prueba de esfericidad de Bartlett y la medida de Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin para determinar correlaciones entre las variables y análisis factorial. Se construyeron 3 versiones del IC, modificándose según la opinión de usuarios y expertos. La validación se llevó a cabo en una muestra de 70 mujeres. La edad media fue de 54,4 años, el 47,1% de educación secundaria completa y el 92,9% al menos se había realizado alguna vez una mamografía. Se realizó análisis factorial del IC y se eliminó uno de sus ítems. El alfa de Cronbach final fue 0,79. El uso de instrumentos de medición requiere de su validación previa ya que la versión original puede variar de acuerdo al contexto cultural donde será aplicado y las necesidades locales particulares. El proceso de validación del IC permite contar con un instrumento confiable para medir la decisión de las mujeres que deben realizarse la mamografía en la dimensión conocimiento, actitud e intención hacia el examen. To adapt and validate for the Chilean context the instrument Informed Choice (IC) to measure informed decision for mammography. Primary Health Care Center in southeast Santiago, Chile. Individual, transversal, analytical and psychometric adaptation and validation study. We 1) translated and back-translated IC; 2) conducted a focus group for cultural/linguistic relevance; 3) reviewed content validity; 4) piloted the instrument; 5) applied IC for validation. Analysis was performed by using Cronbach alpha, correlation, Bartlett's test of sphericity, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure and factor analysis. Three versions of the IC were developed, which included changes according to the views of users and experts. Validation was conducted in a sample of 70 women. Mean age was 54,4 years, 47,1% had completed secondary school and 92,9% have had at least one mammography. After factor analysis item 1 was removed and the final Cronbach Alpha was 0,79. The Chilean IC is reliable to measure decision women for mammography, this evaluate knowledge, attitude and intention towards the screening. The validation of an instrument to the cultural context is necessary and may have any variations to the original version according to local needs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 it